🔗 Share this article

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

Refusal to Give Phone Password

The right-wing campaigner, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, reportedly refused to provide his password to police, claiming it included “journalistic material.” This occurred after he was intercepted at the Eurotunnel 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 claimed that officers had reasonable suspicion to think the defendant continued to have connections to far-right activists, even after the dissolution of the EDL organization.

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

Morris added, His opinions – to which he is allowed – were not the focus for their attention on 28 July. It was his connection to others who are potentially involved in illegal actions.”

Circumstances of the Detention

The campaigner had turned up alone at the Eurotunnel in a silver Bentley belonging to a friend and was on his way to the Spanish resort of Benidorm with more than £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial heard.

The funds was said to have been from a donation drive to offset costs from organizing a large demonstration that occurred the previous day in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Arguments

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

His lawyer, defense counsel, said in closing submissions that counter-terrorism police who stopped his client had engaged in a speculative search” and that he had been illegally held.

Citing evidence from officers who said they contacted “partner agencies” after arresting Robinson, the defense lawyer claimed this was a reference to the security services and that no evidence had been offered from the security service to indicate his client was a terrorist.

Williamson asserted the officers’ action was “discriminatory” because it was based to a large extent on a personal attribute.” He said that the main factor” on the decision to stop him was recognizing his identity”.

He noted that officers had used an “extraordinary power that must be properly policed” to try to discover information that was previously available. Williamson suggested that Robinson journeyed to Benidorm regularly, which should have reduced the police suspicions about him.

Legal Costs and Verdict Timing

Robinson claimed that his court expenses in the proceedings were being covered by Elon Musk, the proprietor of social media and electric car companies, who has emerged as an ally of the campaigner and recently spoke at a rally organized by him in London via a online broadcast.

A proposed date of next Tuesday for the verdict was changed by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after Williamson explained Robinson was due to be a guest of the Israeli government from Wednesday and would not return 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,” said the barrister.

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