🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the tribunal that law enforcement maintained reasonable suspicions that Tommy Robinson's mobile contained material relevant to terrorist activities when they stopped him in the previous year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Denial to Provide Device Password

The right-wing campaigner, using his real name is Tommy Robinson, allegedly refused to hand over his password to officers, stating it included journalist content.” This occurred after he was stopped at the Channel tunnel on 28 July 2024.

Prosecution Claims on Anti-Terror Powers

On the last day of the proceedings, prosecutor Jo Morris stated that the anti-terror authorities employed by law enforcement are intended to allow intelligence gathering. She claimed that officers had valid grounds to believe Robinson still have links to far-right activists, even following the disbandment of the English Defence League (EDL).

“Although his membership of the EDL has come to an end, his beliefs have not disappeared. He is recognized for holding those views and therefore it is a valid concern to think that on his phone there could be data relevant to terrorist acts,” she told the court.

The prosecutor added, “His beliefs – to which he is entitled – were not the subject for their concern on July 28. It was his connection to individuals who are possibly involved in prohibited activities.”

Details of the Stop

The activist had turned up alone at the Eurotunnel in a silver Bentley owned by a acquaintance and was traveling to the holiday destination of the Spanish coast with more than £13,000 in a small bag, the court heard.

The money was said to have been from a donation drive to offset costs from arranging a large demonstration that occurred the day before in a London landmark.

Defense Submissions

The defendant, who disputes failing to comply with counter-terrorism powers during the incident on 28 July last year, faces up to three months in prison or a possible £2,500 penalty if found guilty.

His barrister, defense counsel, said in closing submissions that anti-terror officers who detained Robinson had conducted a “fishing expedition” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Citing evidence from officers who stated they contacted “partner agencies” after arresting him, Williamson said this was a allusion to the security services and that no evidence had been presented from the security service to suggest his defendant was a security threat.

He said the police intervention was biased” because it was based to a “significant degree on a personal attribute.” He said that the main factor” on the choice to stop him was recognizing his identity”.

He noted that officers had used an special authority that needs to be carefully regulated” to try to discover details that was already known. The barrister proposed that his client traveled to Benidorm frequently, which ought to have reduced the officers’ concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Verdict Timing

Robinson stated that his court expenses in the proceedings were being paid for by Elon Musk, the owner of social media and electric car companies, who has emerged as an supporter of the campaigner and recently addressed a gathering organized by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A suggested date of the following Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after Williamson explained his client was scheduled to be a invitee of the Israeli government from the midweek and would not return until October 25.

{“I wouldn’t trouble you if this was a trip to Benidorm. I would ask him to rearrange it but he is a guest of a foreign government,” said the barrister.

The judge announced he would deliver his verdict on the start of 4 November.