Prosecutors told the court that police had valid concerns that Tommy Robinson's mobile held information related to terrorist activities when they detained him in the previous year as he attempted to leave the UK.
The right-wing campaigner, whose real name is Tommy Robinson, allegedly declined to provide his phone pin to officers, stating it included “journalistic material.” This happened after he was stopped at the Channel tunnel on July 28, 2024.
On the last day of the proceedings, prosecutor Jo Morris stated that the counter-terrorism powers used by police are designed to permit information collection. She asserted that police had valid grounds to believe Robinson continued to have connections to right-wing groups, even after the dissolution of the EDL organization.
While his membership of the English Defence League has come to an end, his beliefs have not gone away. He is known for holding those views and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his phone there could be data relevant to acts of terrorism,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.
The prosecutor continued, “His beliefs – to which he is entitled – were not the focus for their concern on July 28. It was his association to others who are potentially engaged in prohibited activities.”
The activist had arrived alone at the Eurotunnel in a silver Bentley owned by a friend and was on his way to the Spanish resort of Benidorm with over £13,000 in a small bag, the trial was told.
The funds was reportedly from a collection to cover costs from arranging a major rally that took place the previous day in a London landmark.
Robinson, who disputes failing to comply with anti-terror laws during the incident on July 28 last year, faces up to three months in prison or a possible £2,500 penalty if convicted.
His barrister, Alisdair Williamson KC, said in final arguments that anti-terror officers who detained Robinson had conducted a “fishing expedition” and that he had been illegally held.
Referring to testimony from police who said they contacted “partner agencies” after detaining him, Williamson said this was a allusion to the security services and that no evidence had been offered from MI5 to suggest his client was a security threat.
He asserted the police action was biased” because it was based to a large extent on a protected characteristic.” He stated that the “predominant influence” on the choice to stop him was recognizing his identity”.
He noted that police had used an “extraordinary power that must be properly policed” to try to find out details that was previously available. The barrister proposed that his client journeyed to Benidorm frequently, which should have lessened the police suspicions about him.
Robinson claimed that his court expenses in the proceedings were being covered by Elon Musk, the owner of social media and electric car companies, who has appeared as an ally of the campaigner and recently spoke at a gathering organized by him in London via a livestream.
A suggested date of next Tuesday for the decision was changed by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after Williamson explained Robinson was scheduled to be a invitee of the Israeli government from the midweek 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,” stated Williamson.
Goozee announced he would deliver his ruling on the morning of 4 November.
