🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors told the tribunal that police maintained reasonable suspicions indicating Tommy Robinson's mobile held information related to acts of terrorism when they stopped him last year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Provide Phone Pin

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

Prosecution Arguments on Counter-Terrorism Authority

On the last day of the proceedings, prosecutor the prosecution argued that the anti-terror authorities used by police are designed to allow information collection. She asserted that police had reasonable suspicion to think the defendant still have connections to right-wing groups, even after the dissolution of the EDL organization.

While his membership of the EDL has come to an end, his views have not gone away. He is recognized for holding those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his phone there may be information pertaining to terrorist acts,” she told Westminster magistrates court.

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

Details of the Detention

The activist had turned up alone at the Channel tunnel in a silver Bentley owned by a acquaintance and was on his way to the holiday destination of Benidorm with over £13,000 in a small bag, the trial was told.

The money was reportedly from a collection to offset costs from arranging a major rally that took place the day before in Trafalgar Square.

Defense Submissions

The defendant, who denies non-compliance with counter-terrorism powers during the encounter on 28 July of the previous year, faces up to three months in prison or a potential £2,500 penalty if found guilty.

His lawyer, defense counsel, argued in closing submissions that counter-terrorism police who stopped his client had engaged in a “fishing expedition” and that he had been illegally held.

Citing evidence from police who stated they contacted other organizations” after detaining Robinson, Williamson said this was a allusion to the security services and that lack of proof had been presented from the security service to indicate his defendant was a security threat.

Williamson said the police intervention was biased” because it was based to a large extent on a personal attribute.” He said that the main factor” on the decision to detain him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He added that officers had used an “extraordinary power that must be properly policed” to try to find out information that was already known. Williamson proposed that Robinson journeyed to Benidorm regularly, which should have reduced the police suspicions about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Date

Robinson stated that his court expenses in the proceedings were being covered by Elon Musk, the owner of X and Tesla, who has emerged as an ally of the far-right activist and lately addressed a rally arranged by him in London via a online broadcast.

A proposed day of the following Tuesday for the verdict was changed by the district judge, the judge, after the defense said 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.

The judge announced he would deliver his verdict on the start of 4 November.