🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives told the court that police maintained valid concerns that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's phone held material relevant to terrorist activities when they stopped him last year as he tried to leave the UK.

Refusal to Provide Phone Pin

The right-wing campaigner, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly refused to provide his phone pin to police, stating it contained “journalistic material.” This occurred after he was intercepted at the Eurotunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Claims on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the final day of the proceedings, prosecutor the prosecution stated that the counter-terrorism powers employed by law enforcement are designed to permit intelligence gathering. She claimed that officers had valid grounds to believe the defendant continued to have connections to far-right activists, even after the disbandment of the English Defence League (EDL).

“Although his membership of the EDL has come to an end, his views have not gone away. He is known for having those views and therefore it is a valid concern to believe that on his phone there may be data relevant to terrorist acts,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.

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

Details of the Detention

The campaigner had arrived alone at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle owned by a friend and was traveling to the Spanish resort of Benidorm with over £13,000 in a small bag, the trial was told.

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

Legal Team Arguments

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

His lawyer, Alisdair Williamson KC, argued in closing submissions that anti-terror officers who stopped Robinson had engaged in a “fishing expedition” and that he had been illegally held.

Referring to testimony from officers who said they called “partner agencies” after arresting him, Williamson said this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that no evidence had been presented from the security service to indicate his defendant was a terrorist.

He asserted the police intervention was biased” because it was based to a “significant degree on a protected characteristic.” He said that the main factor” on the choice to detain him was recognizing his identity”.

He added that police had used an special authority that must be properly policed” to try to discover information that was previously available. Williamson proposed that his client journeyed to the resort regularly, which should have reduced the officers’ suspicions about him.

Expenses and Verdict Date

The activist stated that his legal costs in the case were being covered by Elon Musk, the proprietor of X and Tesla, who has emerged as an ally of the far-right activist and lately spoke at a rally organized by him in the capital via a livestream.

A suggested date of next Tuesday for the decision was altered by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after the defense said his client was due to be a guest of the Israeli government from Wednesday 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 the barrister.

The judge said he would deliver his verdict on the morning of 4 November.