🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the court that law enforcement maintained valid concerns that Tommy Robinson's mobile held material related to acts of terrorism when they detained him in the previous year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Denial to Provide Phone Password

The right-wing campaigner, whose legal name is Tommy Robinson, reportedly refused to hand over his phone pin to police, stating it included “journalistic material.” This occurred after he was stopped at the Channel tunnel on 28 July 2024.

Trial Claims on Anti-Terror Powers

On the final day of the proceedings, prosecutor Jo Morris argued that the counter-terrorism powers employed by police are intended to permit information collection. She claimed that officers had reasonable suspicion to think Robinson continued to have connections to far-right activists, even following the dissolution of the English Defence League (EDL).

While his affiliation of the EDL has ceased, his beliefs have not disappeared. He is known for having those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to believe that on his phone there may be data relevant to acts of terrorism,” she told Westminster magistrates court.

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

Circumstances of the Stop

The campaigner had arrived by himself at the Eurotunnel in a silver Bentley belonging to a acquaintance and was on his way to the holiday destination of Benidorm with more than £13,000 in a carry-on, the court was told.

The money was said to have been from a donation drive to cover costs from arranging a major rally that took place the previous day in a London landmark.

Defense Submissions

The defendant, who disputes failing to comply with anti-terror laws during the incident on 28 July last year, faces up to three months in jail or a potential £2,500 penalty if convicted.

His barrister, defense counsel, said in closing submissions that counter-terrorism police who detained his client had conducted a “fishing expedition” and that he had been illegally held.

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

Williamson asserted the officers’ action was “discriminatory” because it was based to a “significant degree on a protected characteristic.” He stated that the “predominant influence” on the decision to detain him was recognizing his identity”.

He added that police had used an special authority that must be carefully regulated” to try to discover information that was already known. Williamson suggested that Robinson journeyed to the resort regularly, which should have reduced the police concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Verdict Date

Robinson claimed that his legal costs in the proceedings were being paid for by Elon Musk, the owner of social media and electric car companies, who has emerged as an supporter of the far-right activist and lately spoke at a gathering organized by him in London via a livestream.

A suggested day of the following Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after the defense explained Robinson was due to be a invitee of the Israeli government 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 the barrister.

Goozee said he would deliver his ruling on the morning of 4 November.