🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors told the court that law enforcement maintained reasonable suspicions that Tommy Robinson's mobile held information relevant to acts of terrorism when they detained him last year as he tried to leave the UK.

Refusal to Give Device Password

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

Trial Claims on Counter-Terrorism Authority

On the final day of the proceedings, state lawyer the prosecution stated that the anti-terror authorities used by law enforcement are intended to allow information collection. She claimed that officers had valid grounds to think Robinson continued to have connections to right-wing groups, even following the dissolution of the EDL organization.

“Although his affiliation of the English Defence League has ceased, his views have not disappeared. He is known for having those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his telephone there may be information relevant to terrorist acts,” she told Westminster magistrates court.

The prosecutor continued, His opinions – to which he is allowed – were not the subject for their attention on 28 July. It was his connection to individuals who are potentially involved in prohibited activities.”

Circumstances of the Stop

The activist had arrived alone at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle owned by a friend and was on his way to the Spanish resort of the Spanish coast with more than £13,000 in a small bag, the court was told.

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.

Defense Arguments

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

His lawyer, Alisdair Williamson KC, argued in closing submissions that anti-terror officers who detained his client had engaged in a speculative search” and that he had been illegally held.

Citing evidence from police who stated they called other organizations” after arresting him, the defense lawyer said this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that no evidence had been presented from MI5 to suggest his client was a terrorist.

Williamson asserted the officers’ intervention was biased” because it was based to a “significant degree on a protected characteristic.” He said that the “predominant influence” on the decision to stop him was recognizing his identity”.

He noted that officers had used an special authority that needs to be properly policed” to try to find out information that was already known. The barrister suggested that Robinson traveled to the resort regularly, which should have lessened the police suspicions about him.

Expenses and Verdict Date

The activist claimed that his legal costs in the proceedings were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the owner of social media and electric car companies, who has appeared as an supporter of the far-right activist and recently spoke at a gathering arranged by him in London via a online broadcast.

A suggested date of next Tuesday for the decision was changed by the district judge, the judge, after Williamson said his client was scheduled to be a invitee of the Israeli government from Wednesday and would not come back 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 announced he would hand down his ruling on the start of 4 November.