🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives told the tribunal that police maintained valid concerns indicating Tommy Robinson's mobile held information relevant to acts of terrorism when they stopped him last year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Give Device Pin

The far-right activist, whose legal name is Tommy Robinson, reportedly declined to hand over his password to police, stating it contained journalist content.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Arguments on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the last day of the proceedings, prosecutor Jo Morris stated that the counter-terrorism powers employed by law enforcement are designed to permit information collection. She claimed that officers had reasonable suspicion to believe Robinson still have links to far-right activists, even after the disbandment of the English Defence League (EDL).

“Although his affiliation of the EDL has come to an end, his beliefs have not gone away. He is recognized for having those views and therefore it is a valid concern to think that on his telephone there could be information relevant to terrorist acts,” she informed the court.

Morris continued, His opinions – to which he is entitled – were not the subject for their concern on 28 July. It was his connection to others who are possibly involved in prohibited activities.”

Details of the Stop

The activist had turned up alone at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle owned by a acquaintance and was on his way to the Spanish resort of the Spanish coast with over £13,000 in a small bag, the trial was told.

The money was said to have been from a donation drive to offset costs from arranging a major rally that took place the previous day in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Arguments

The defendant, who disputes non-compliance with anti-terror laws during the encounter on 28 July of the previous year, faces up to three months in prison or a potential £2,500 penalty if convicted.

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

Citing evidence from officers who said they contacted other organizations” after detaining him, the defense lawyer said this was a reference to the security services and that lack of proof had been presented from the security service to indicate his client was a security threat.

Williamson said the police action was biased” because it was based to a “significant degree on a personal attribute.” He stated that the “predominant influence” on the decision to detain him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He added that police had used an special authority that must be properly policed” to try to discover details that was already known. Williamson suggested that Robinson traveled to the resort regularly, which should have lessened the police suspicions about him.

Expenses and Verdict Timing

The activist stated that his legal costs in the case were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the proprietor 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 London via a livestream.

A suggested date of the following Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after Williamson said Robinson was scheduled to be a guest 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,” said Williamson.

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