🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the tribunal that law enforcement maintained valid concerns indicating Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's mobile held material related to acts of terrorism when they stopped him in the previous year as he attempted to leave the UK.

Refusal to Give Phone Pin

The far-right activist, using his real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly refused to hand over his phone pin to officers, stating it contained journalist content.” This happened after he was stopped at the Eurotunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Claims on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the final day of the proceedings, prosecutor Jo Morris argued that the counter-terrorism powers used by law enforcement are intended to permit intelligence gathering. She asserted that police had reasonable suspicion to believe Robinson still have connections to right-wing groups, even following the disbandment of the English Defence League (EDL).

“Although his affiliation of the English Defence League has come to an end, his beliefs have not disappeared. He is known for having those views and therefore it is a valid concern to think that on his telephone there may be data pertaining to terrorist acts,” she informed the court.

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

Circumstances of the Stop

The campaigner had turned up by himself at the Channel tunnel in a silver Bentley belonging to a friend and was traveling to the Spanish resort of Benidorm with over £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial heard.

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

Legal Team Arguments

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

His barrister, Alisdair Williamson KC, said in closing submissions that counter-terrorism police who detained his client had engaged in a “fishing expedition” and that he had been illegally held.

Citing evidence from police who said they contacted “partner agencies” after detaining Robinson, Williamson claimed this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that no evidence had been presented from MI5 to suggest his defendant was a terrorist.

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

He added that officers had used an special authority that needs to be properly policed” to try to find out details that was already known. Williamson proposed that Robinson traveled to the resort regularly, which ought to have reduced the police concerns about him.

Expenses and Judgment Timing

The activist claimed that his legal costs in the case were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the owner of social media and electric car companies, who has appeared as an ally of the far-right activist and recently spoke at a gathering arranged by him in London via a online broadcast.

A proposed day of next Tuesday for the decision was altered by the district judge, the judge, after the defense explained Robinson was scheduled to be a guest of the Israeli government 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,” said Williamson.

Goozee said he would hand down his verdict on the morning of 4 November.