🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors told the tribunal that police had reasonable suspicions that Tommy Robinson's mobile contained material relevant to acts of terrorism when they detained him in the previous year as he tried to leave the UK.

Refusal to Give Device Pin

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

Prosecution Arguments on Anti-Terror Powers

On the last day of the proceedings, prosecutor Jo Morris stated that the counter-terrorism powers used by law enforcement are intended to allow information collection. She asserted that officers had valid grounds to believe Robinson continued to have links to right-wing groups, even after the disbandment of the EDL organization.

While his affiliation of the EDL has come to an end, his beliefs have not gone away. He is known for having those views and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to believe that on his phone there could be data pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she informed the court.

Morris continued, “His beliefs – to which he is entitled – were not the subject for their concern on July 28. It was his association to others who are potentially engaged in prohibited activities.”

Circumstances of the Detention

The activist had turned up alone at the Eurotunnel in a silver Bentley belonging to a acquaintance and was on his way to the holiday destination of Benidorm with over £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial heard.

The funds was said to have been from a collection to cover expenses from organizing a major rally that took place the previous day in a London landmark.

Legal Team Arguments

Robinson, who disputes non-compliance with anti-terror laws during the encounter on July 28 of the previous year, faces up to 90 days in prison or a potential £2,500 fine if found guilty.

His lawyer, defense counsel, argued in final arguments that counter-terrorism police who detained his client had engaged in a “fishing expedition” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Citing testimony from police who said they contacted other organizations” after arresting Robinson, the defense lawyer said this was a allusion to the security services and that no evidence had been presented from the security service to suggest his client was a security threat.

He said the officers’ action was biased” because it was based to a “significant degree on a personal attribute.” He said that the “predominant influence” on the decision to stop him was recognizing his identity”.

He noted that police had used an “extraordinary power that needs to be carefully regulated” to try to find out information that was already known. Williamson proposed that his client traveled to the resort frequently, which should have lessened the police concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Verdict Date

Robinson claimed that his court expenses in the case were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the owner of X and Tesla, who has emerged as an ally of the far-right activist and recently spoke at a rally organized by him in London via a online broadcast.

A suggested day of the following Tuesday for the verdict was changed by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after Williamson explained Robinson was scheduled to be a invitee of the Israel's administration from the midweek and would not return 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.

The judge announced he would hand down his ruling on the morning of 4 November.