🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives told the court that police had valid concerns indicating Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's mobile held material related to terrorist activities when they detained him last year as he tried to leave the UK.

Refusal to Give Phone Pin

The right-wing campaigner, using his real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly refused to hand over his phone pin to police, claiming it included “journalistic material.” This happened after he was stopped at the Eurotunnel on 28 July 2024.

Trial Claims on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the final day of the proceedings, state lawyer the prosecution stated that the counter-terrorism powers employed by law enforcement are designed to permit intelligence gathering. She claimed that police had reasonable suspicion to think Robinson still have links to far-right activists, even following the dissolution of the EDL organization.

“Although his membership of the EDL has ceased, his beliefs have not disappeared. He is known for having those views and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to believe that on his telephone there may be data relevant to terrorist acts,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.

Morris continued, “His beliefs – to which he is allowed – were not the focus for their concern on 28 July. It was his connection to others who are possibly involved in prohibited activities.”

Circumstances of the Stop

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

The funds was said to have been from a donation drive to cover costs from organizing a large demonstration that occurred the day before in a London landmark.

Defense Arguments

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

His barrister, Alisdair Williamson KC, argued in final arguments that counter-terrorism police who detained Robinson had conducted a speculative search” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Citing evidence from officers who said they contacted other organizations” after arresting him, Williamson claimed this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that no evidence had been offered from MI5 to suggest his defendant was a security threat.

Williamson asserted the police action was “discriminatory” because it was based to a “significant degree on a personal attribute.” He stated that the “predominant influence” on the choice 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. The barrister suggested that his client journeyed to the resort regularly, which should have lessened the police suspicions about him.

Expenses and Judgment Timing

Robinson stated that his legal costs in the proceedings were being paid for by Elon Musk, the proprietor of social media and electric car companies, who has appeared as an ally of the far-right activist and lately spoke at a rally arranged by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A proposed date of next Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after Williamson said his client was scheduled to be a guest of the Israeli government from the midweek 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 hand down his ruling on the morning of 4 November.