🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the court that police maintained reasonable suspicions that Tommy Robinson's phone contained material relevant to terrorist activities when they detained him in the previous year as he attempted to leave the UK.

Refusal to Provide Device Pin

The right-wing campaigner, using his legal name is Tommy Robinson, reportedly refused to provide his phone pin to officers, stating it contained journalist content.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Eurotunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Arguments on Anti-Terror Authority

On the last day of the trial, prosecutor Jo Morris stated that the anti-terror authorities employed by law enforcement are designed to permit information collection. She claimed that police had reasonable suspicion to believe Robinson still have links to far-right activists, even following the disbandment of the EDL organization.

While his membership of the EDL has come to an end, his views have not gone away. He is known for holding those opinions and therefore it is a valid concern to think that on his phone there could be information pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.

Morris continued, His opinions – to which he is allowed – were not the subject for their concern on July 28. It was his association to individuals who are possibly involved in prohibited activities.”

Circumstances of the Detention

The activist had turned up alone at the Eurotunnel in a silver Bentley owned by a friend and was on his way to the holiday destination of the Spanish coast with more than £13,000 in a small bag, the trial was told.

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

Defense Arguments

Robinson, who disputes failing to comply with counter-terrorism powers during the incident on 28 July last year, could receive up to three months in prison or a potential £2,500 fine if convicted.

His lawyer, Alisdair Williamson KC, said in closing submissions that anti-terror officers who stopped Robinson had conducted a “fishing expedition” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Citing testimony from police who stated they called other organizations” after arresting him, Williamson said this was a reference to the security services and that lack of proof had been presented from MI5 to indicate his client was a terrorist.

Williamson asserted the police action was “discriminatory” because it was based to a large extent on a protected characteristic.” He stated that the “predominant influence” on the choice to stop him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He noted that police had used an special authority that must be properly policed” to try to discover information that was previously available. The barrister suggested that Robinson traveled to the resort regularly, which ought to have lessened the police concerns about him.

Expenses and Judgment Timing

The activist claimed that his legal costs in the case were being covered by Elon Musk, the proprietor of X and Tesla, who has emerged as an ally of the campaigner and recently addressed a gathering arranged by him in the capital via a livestream.

A proposed date of the following Tuesday for the verdict was changed by the district judge, the judge, after Williamson said his client was due to be a guest of the Israel's administration from Wednesday 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,” stated Williamson.

The judge said he would deliver his ruling on the start of 4 November.