🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives told the tribunal that law enforcement maintained valid concerns indicating Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's mobile held information relevant to terrorist activities when they stopped him last year as he attempted to leave the UK.

Refusal to Give Device Pin

The far-right activist, using his legal name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly refused to hand over his password to police, stating it contained “journalistic material.” This occurred after he was intercepted at the Eurotunnel on 28 July 2024.

Trial Arguments on Anti-Terror Authority

On the last day of the proceedings, state lawyer the prosecution argued that the counter-terrorism powers used by law enforcement are designed to allow intelligence gathering. She claimed that police had valid grounds to think the defendant continued to have links to right-wing groups, even following the dissolution of the English Defence League (EDL).

“Although his affiliation of the English Defence League has ceased, his beliefs have not gone away. He is known for having those opinions and therefore it is a valid concern to think that on his telephone there may be information relevant to terrorist acts,” she informed the court.

The prosecutor added, “His beliefs – to which he is allowed – were not the subject for their concern on July 28. It was his association to individuals who are potentially engaged in prohibited activities.”

Details of the Stop

The activist had arrived alone at the Channel tunnel in a luxury vehicle belonging to a friend and was traveling to the holiday destination of the Spanish coast with more than £13,000 in a carry-on, the court heard.

The money was said to have been from a donation drive to offset expenses from organizing a large demonstration that occurred the previous day in a London landmark.

Legal Team Submissions

Robinson, who disputes non-compliance with counter-terrorism powers during the incident on July 28 of the previous year, faces up to 90 days in jail or a potential £2,500 penalty if found guilty.

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

Citing evidence from police who said they contacted other organizations” after arresting him, Williamson said this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that no evidence had been presented from MI5 to suggest his client was a security threat.

Williamson asserted the police intervention was biased” because it was based to a large extent on a personal attribute.” He said that the “predominant influence” on the decision to detain him was recognizing his identity”.

He noted that police had used an special authority that must be carefully regulated” to try to discover information that was already known. The barrister suggested that Robinson journeyed to Benidorm regularly, which ought to have lessened the police concerns about him.

Expenses and Judgment Timing

Robinson stated that his court expenses in the proceedings were being covered by the tech billionaire, the owner of X and Tesla, who has appeared as an ally of the far-right activist and recently addressed a rally arranged by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A suggested date of the following Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after the defense explained Robinson was scheduled to be a invitee of the Israel's administration 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 the barrister.

Goozee said he would deliver his ruling on the morning of 4 November.