🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives told the tribunal that police had valid concerns indicating Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's mobile contained information relevant to terrorist activities when they stopped him in the previous year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Provide Device Pin

The right-wing campaigner, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly refused to hand over his password to police, stating it contained “journalistic material.” This occurred after he was intercepted at the Eurotunnel on July 28, 2024.

Trial Arguments on Anti-Terror Authority

On the last day of the trial, prosecutor Jo Morris stated that the counter-terrorism powers employed by police are designed to permit information collection. She claimed that officers had valid grounds to think the defendant still have links to far-right activists, even after the dissolution of the English Defence League (EDL).

While his membership of the EDL has ceased, his beliefs have not disappeared. He is known for holding those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his phone there may be data pertaining to terrorist acts,” she informed the court.

Morris added, “His beliefs – to which he is allowed – were not the subject for their attention on 28 July. It was his association to others who are potentially engaged in prohibited activities.”

Circumstances of the Detention

The campaigner had arrived by himself at the Eurotunnel in a silver Bentley belonging to a acquaintance and was traveling to the Spanish resort of Benidorm with over £13,000 in a small bag, the court was told.

The funds was said to have been from a collection to cover expenses from arranging a major rally that occurred the day before in Trafalgar Square.

Defense Submissions

The defendant, who denies non-compliance with counter-terrorism powers during the encounter on July 28 of the previous year, could receive up to 90 days in prison or a possible £2,500 penalty if found guilty.

His lawyer, Alisdair Williamson KC, argued in closing submissions that anti-terror officers who detained his client had engaged in a speculative search” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Referring to evidence from officers who said they called “partner agencies” after arresting him, Williamson said this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that lack of proof had been presented from MI5 to indicate his client was a terrorist.

Williamson said the officers’ intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a large extent on a protected characteristic.” He said that the main factor” on the decision to stop him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He added that officers had used an “extraordinary power that needs to be carefully regulated” to try to find out details that was already known. Williamson suggested that his client traveled to the resort regularly, which ought to have lessened the officers’ concerns about him.

Expenses and Judgment Timing

The activist stated that his legal costs in the case were being covered by the tech billionaire, the owner of X and Tesla, who has appeared as an ally of the far-right activist and lately spoke at a gathering organized by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A suggested date of next Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after Williamson explained his client was scheduled to be a invitee of the Israeli government from Wednesday and would not come back 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,” stated the barrister.

Goozee announced he would hand down his ruling on the start of 4 November.