🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives informed the court that police had valid concerns that Tommy Robinson's mobile contained material relevant to acts of terrorism when they detained him last year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Provide Phone Password

The far-right activist, using his real name is Tommy Robinson, allegedly refused to provide his password to officers, stating it contained journalist content.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on July 28, 2024.

Trial Claims on Counter-Terrorism Authority

On the last day of the proceedings, state lawyer Jo Morris stated that the anti-terror authorities employed by law enforcement are intended to permit intelligence gathering. She asserted that officers had valid grounds to think the defendant still have links to right-wing groups, even following the dissolution of the English Defence League (EDL).

While his membership of the English Defence League has ceased, his views have not disappeared. He is known for having those views and therefore it is a valid concern to believe that on his telephone there may be data pertaining to terrorist acts,” she informed the court.

Morris added, His opinions – to which he is allowed – were not the focus for their concern on 28 July. It was his association to individuals who are potentially engaged in illegal actions.”

Circumstances of the Stop

The activist had arrived alone at the Channel tunnel in a luxury vehicle belonging to a friend and was traveling to the Spanish resort of the Spanish coast with over £13,000 in a small bag, the court heard.

The money was reportedly from a collection to cover expenses from organizing a major rally that took place the previous day in a London landmark.

Legal Team Submissions

Robinson, who disputes non-compliance with counter-terrorism powers during the incident on July 28 of the previous year, faces up to 90 days in prison or a possible £2,500 penalty if found guilty.

His lawyer, defense counsel, argued in closing submissions that anti-terror officers who stopped his client had conducted a speculative search” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Citing testimony from police who stated they contacted other organizations” after detaining him, the defense lawyer said this was a allusion to the security services and that no evidence had been offered from MI5 to suggest his defendant was a terrorist.

He said the officers’ action was “discriminatory” because it was based to a “significant degree on a protected characteristic.” He stated that the main factor” on the choice to detain him was recognizing his identity”.

He added that police had used an special authority that must be carefully regulated” to try to find out details that was previously available. Williamson suggested that Robinson traveled to Benidorm regularly, which should have reduced the officers’ concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Verdict Timing

The activist stated that his court expenses in the proceedings were being covered by the tech billionaire, the owner of X and Tesla, who has emerged as an ally of the far-right activist and lately spoke at a rally arranged by him in London via a livestream.

A proposed day of next Tuesday for the decision was changed by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after Williamson said Robinson was scheduled to be a invitee of the Israeli government from the midweek 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 the barrister.

Goozee announced he would hand down his verdict on the morning of 4 November.