🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors told the court that police had reasonable suspicions that Tommy Robinson's phone held information relevant to terrorist activities when they detained him last year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Provide Device Pin

The right-wing campaigner, whose real name is Tommy Robinson, allegedly declined to provide his password to officers, claiming it contained journalist content.” This occurred after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Claims on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the last day of the proceedings, prosecutor Jo Morris argued that the counter-terrorism powers employed by law enforcement are intended to permit intelligence gathering. She asserted that officers had valid grounds to believe Robinson continued to have links to far-right activists, even after the disbandment of the English Defence League (EDL).

“Although his affiliation of the English Defence League has ceased, his beliefs have not gone away. He is recognized for having those views and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his phone there could be data pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she told the court.

Morris added, His opinions – to which he is entitled – were not the subject for their attention on 28 July. It was his association to individuals who are possibly engaged in illegal actions.”

Details of the Detention

The campaigner had arrived by himself at the Channel tunnel in a silver Bentley owned by a acquaintance and was on his way to the Spanish resort of the Spanish coast with over £13,000 in a small bag, the trial was told.

The money was reportedly from a donation drive to cover expenses from arranging a major rally that occurred the previous day in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Submissions

The defendant, who denies non-compliance with anti-terror laws during the encounter on July 28 last year, faces up to 90 days in prison or a possible £2,500 penalty if found guilty.

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

Citing testimony from officers who stated they called “partner agencies” after arresting him, the defense lawyer claimed this was a reference to the security services and that no evidence had been presented from the security service to suggest his defendant was a terrorist.

Williamson said the officers’ action was biased” because it was based to a large extent on a personal attribute.” He said that the “predominant influence” on the choice to detain him was recognizing his identity”.

He noted that officers had used an special authority that needs to be carefully regulated” to try to discover details that was already known. Williamson suggested that Robinson traveled to Benidorm frequently, which should have lessened the officers’ suspicions about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Timing

Robinson claimed that his legal costs in the proceedings were being covered by the tech billionaire, the proprietor of social media and electric car companies, who has emerged as an ally of the far-right activist and lately spoke at a rally organized by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A proposed day of next Tuesday for the verdict was changed by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after Williamson explained Robinson was due to be a invitee 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 Williamson.

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