🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives told the court that police maintained valid concerns that Tommy Robinson's mobile held information related to terrorist activities when they stopped him last year as he attempted to leave the UK.

Denial to Give Device Password

The far-right activist, using his legal name is Tommy Robinson, allegedly refused to provide his password to police, claiming it contained journalist content.” This occurred after he was stopped at the Eurotunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Claims on Anti-Terror Powers

On the final day of the trial, prosecutor Jo Morris stated that the anti-terror authorities employed by law enforcement are intended to allow intelligence gathering. She claimed that police had valid grounds to think the defendant continued to have links to right-wing groups, even after the disbandment of the EDL organization.

While his affiliation of the English Defence League has ceased, his views have not disappeared. He is known for having those views and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his phone there could be data relevant to acts of terrorism,” she informed the court.

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

Details of the Detention

The campaigner had turned up by himself at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle belonging to a acquaintance and was on his way to the holiday destination of the Spanish coast with over £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial heard.

The funds was said to have been from a donation drive to offset costs from arranging a large demonstration that occurred the day before in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Arguments

Robinson, who disputes failing to comply with counter-terrorism powers during the encounter on 28 July last year, faces up to three months in jail or a possible £2,500 fine if convicted.

His lawyer, defense counsel, argued in final arguments that counter-terrorism police who detained his client had engaged in a speculative search” and that he had been illegally held.

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

Williamson said the police action was biased” because it was based to a large extent on a protected characteristic.” He said that the main factor” on the choice to stop him was recognizing his identity”.

He noted that police had used an “extraordinary power that needs to be properly policed” to try to find out information that was already known. The barrister proposed that his client journeyed to Benidorm regularly, which should have reduced the police concerns about him.

Expenses and Verdict Timing

Robinson stated that his court expenses in the proceedings were being covered by the tech billionaire, the proprietor of X and Tesla, who has appeared as an ally of the far-right activist and lately addressed a rally organized by him in London via a livestream.

A suggested date of next Tuesday for the decision was changed by the district judge, the judge, after the defense said Robinson was due to be a guest of the Israel's administration from Wednesday and would not return until 25 October.

{“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 Williamson.

The judge said he would hand down his verdict on the morning of 4 November.