Legal representatives told the court that police maintained valid concerns indicating Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's phone contained material related to terrorist activities when they detained 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 provide his phone pin to officers, claiming it contained journalist content.” This happened after he was stopped at the Eurotunnel on 28 July 2024.
Trial Claims on Anti-Terror Authority
On the last day of the trial, prosecutor the prosecution stated that the anti-terror authorities used by police are intended to allow intelligence gathering. She claimed that officers had reasonable suspicion to believe the defendant still have links to far-right activists, even following the dissolution of the English Defence League (EDL).
“Although his membership of the EDL has ceased, his beliefs have not disappeared. He is recognized for holding those views and therefore it is a valid concern to believe that on his phone there could be information pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she informed the court.
Morris added, His opinions – to which he is entitled – were not the focus for their concern on 28 July. It was his association to individuals who are potentially involved in illegal actions.”
Details of the Detention
The activist had arrived alone at the Channel tunnel in a luxury vehicle owned by a acquaintance and was traveling to the holiday destination of the Spanish coast with more than £13,000 in a small bag, the court was told.
The funds was said to have been from a collection to cover expenses from arranging a major rally that took place the day before in a London landmark.
Legal Team Submissions
Robinson, who disputes non-compliance with anti-terror laws during the incident on July 28 last year, could receive up to three months in jail or a possible £2,500 fine if convicted.
His lawyer, defense counsel, said in closing submissions that anti-terror officers who detained his client had engaged in a speculative search” and that he had been unlawfully detained.
Referring to evidence from officers who said they called other organizations” after arresting him, Williamson said this was a reference to the security services and that no evidence had been offered from the security service to indicate his defendant was a terrorist.
He asserted the police action was “discriminatory” because it was based to a large extent on a protected characteristic.” He stated that the main factor” on the choice to detain him was recognizing his identity”.
He noted that police had used an special authority that must be carefully regulated” to try to find out details that was already known. The barrister proposed that Robinson traveled to the resort frequently, which ought to have reduced the police concerns about him.
Expenses and Judgment Timing
Robinson claimed that his legal costs in the case were being covered by Elon Musk, the owner of X and Tesla, who has emerged as an ally of the far-right activist and recently addressed a gathering organized by him in the capital via a livestream.
A proposed date of next Tuesday for the verdict was changed by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after Williamson said his client was due to be a guest of the Israeli government from the midweek and would not come back 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.
Goozee announced he would hand down his verdict on the start of 4 November.
