Officers Suspected Stephen Yaxley-Lennon Had Terrorist Data on Phone, Court Hears.

Prosecutors informed the tribunal that law enforcement had valid concerns indicating Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's phone contained material relevant to acts of terrorism when they detained him last year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Provide Phone Password

The far-right activist, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, reportedly declined to hand over his password to police, claiming it contained “journalistic material.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on 28 July 2024.

Trial Arguments on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the final day of the proceedings, prosecutor Jo Morris stated that the anti-terror authorities employed by police are designed to permit intelligence gathering. She claimed that police had valid grounds to think the defendant still have links to right-wing groups, even following the disbandment of the EDL organization.

“Although his affiliation of the English Defence League has come to an end, his beliefs have not gone away. He is recognized for having those views and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to believe that on his telephone there may be data relevant to terrorist acts,” she told Westminster magistrates court.

Morris added, “His beliefs – to which he is entitled – were not the subject for their concern on July 28. It was his connection to others who are potentially involved in prohibited activities.”

Circumstances of the Stop

The activist had arrived by himself at the Eurotunnel in a silver Bentley belonging to a friend and was traveling to the holiday destination of the Spanish coast with over £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial was told.

The funds was reportedly from a donation drive to cover expenses from arranging a large demonstration that occurred the previous day in a London landmark.

Legal Team Arguments

The defendant, who denies failing to comply with counter-terrorism powers during the incident on 28 July of the previous year, faces up to three months in jail or a possible £2,500 fine if convicted.

His lawyer, defense counsel, said in closing submissions that counter-terrorism police who detained his client had conducted a speculative search” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Referring to evidence from police who said they contacted “partner agencies” after arresting Robinson, the defense lawyer said this was a reference to the security services and that lack of proof had been offered from MI5 to suggest his defendant was a security threat.

Williamson asserted the officers’ intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a “significant degree on a protected characteristic.” He said that the main factor” on the decision to stop him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He added that officers had used an “extraordinary power that needs to be carefully regulated” to try to discover details that was already known. Williamson suggested that his client traveled to the resort frequently, which should have lessened the police concerns about him.

Expenses and Verdict Timing

Robinson claimed that his court expenses in the case were being covered by Elon Musk, the owner of X and Tesla, who has appeared as an supporter of the campaigner and lately addressed a gathering organized by him in London via a online broadcast.

A proposed date of the following Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the magistrate, the judge, after the defense said Robinson was due to be a invitee of the Israeli government from the midweek and would not return 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,” stated Williamson.

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