🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives informed the court that police maintained reasonable suspicions indicating Tommy Robinson's phone contained information related to acts of terrorism when they stopped him last year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Denial to Give Phone Pin

The far-right activist, whose legal name is Tommy Robinson, reportedly refused to provide his phone pin to police, stating it contained “journalistic material.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Eurotunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Claims on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the last day of the proceedings, prosecutor Jo Morris stated that the counter-terrorism powers used by police are intended to permit intelligence gathering. She asserted that police had reasonable suspicion to believe the defendant continued to have connections to right-wing groups, even after the dissolution of the EDL organization.

While his membership of the EDL has ceased, his views have not disappeared. He is recognized for having those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to believe that on his phone there may be information pertaining to terrorist acts,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.

The prosecutor continued, His opinions – to which he is entitled – were not the focus for their attention on 28 July. It was his connection to others who are possibly engaged in illegal actions.”

Details of the Stop

The campaigner had arrived 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 more than £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial was told.

The money was said to have been from a collection to offset costs from organizing a major rally that occurred the day before in a London landmark.

Defense Submissions

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

His lawyer, defense counsel, argued in closing submissions that anti-terror officers who stopped Robinson had engaged in a “fishing expedition” and that he had been illegally held.

Citing evidence from officers who said they contacted other organizations” after detaining him, the defense lawyer said this was a reference to the intelligence agencies and that no evidence had been presented from MI5 to suggest his client was a security threat.

He said the officers’ action was biased” because it was based to a large extent 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 “extraordinary power that must be properly policed” to try to find out details that was previously available. Williamson suggested that his client traveled to Benidorm regularly, which ought to have lessened the officers’ suspicions about him.

Legal Costs and Verdict Date

The activist claimed that his legal costs in the proceedings were being paid for by Elon Musk, the proprietor of X and Tesla, who has appeared as an supporter of the campaigner and recently addressed a rally organized by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A suggested day of next Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after Williamson explained his client was due to be a guest of the Israel's administration 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 Williamson.

Goozee said he would hand down his verdict on the start of 4 November.