🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the tribunal that law enforcement maintained valid concerns that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's mobile held material related to terrorist activities when they detained him in the previous year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Denial to Provide Device Pin

The far-right activist, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly declined to provide his password to officers, claiming it included journalist content.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Eurotunnel on 28 July 2024.

Prosecution Arguments on Anti-Terror Powers

On the final day of the trial, state lawyer Jo Morris stated that the anti-terror authorities employed by law enforcement are designed to permit 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 English Defence League (EDL).

“Although his membership of the English Defence League has ceased, his views have not gone away. He is known for holding those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to believe that on his phone there could be information pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she told Westminster magistrates court.

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

Circumstances of the Stop

The activist had turned up by himself at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle owned by a friend and was traveling to the Spanish resort of the Spanish coast 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 arranging a major rally that occurred the day before in a London landmark.

Legal Team Submissions

The defendant, who denies failing to comply with anti-terror laws during the encounter on 28 July last year, could receive up to 90 days in jail or a potential £2,500 fine if convicted.

His barrister, defense counsel, argued in final arguments that anti-terror officers who stopped Robinson had engaged in a “fishing expedition” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Referring to testimony from police who said they contacted other organizations” after arresting him, the defense lawyer claimed this was a allusion to the security services and that lack of proof had been presented from MI5 to suggest his defendant was a security threat.

He asserted the police intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a “significant degree on a personal attribute.” He said that the main factor” on the choice to detain him was recognizing his identity”.

He added that officers had used an “extraordinary power that must be properly policed” to try to find out details that was already known. The barrister proposed that his client journeyed to Benidorm regularly, which ought to have lessened the police suspicions about him.

Legal Costs and Verdict Timing

Robinson claimed that his court expenses in the case were being covered by Elon Musk, the proprietor of social media and electric car companies, who has emerged as an supporter of the far-right activist and recently spoke at a rally organized by him in the capital via a livestream.

A suggested day of the following Tuesday for the decision was changed by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after Williamson said his client was scheduled to be a guest 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,” said Williamson.

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