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

Legal representatives informed the court that police had reasonable suspicions indicating Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's mobile contained material relevant to acts of terrorism when they detained him in the previous year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Give Phone Pin

The far-right activist, using his legal name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, reportedly declined to provide his password to police, stating it contained journalist content.” This happened after he was stopped at the Eurotunnel on 28 July 2024.

Prosecution Arguments on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the last day of the trial, state lawyer the prosecution stated that the counter-terrorism powers employed by police are designed to permit intelligence gathering. She asserted that officers had valid grounds to think the defendant still have links to far-right activists, even following the dissolution of the EDL organization.

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

Morris continued, “His beliefs – to which he is allowed – were not the subject for their attention on 28 July. It was his association to others who are possibly involved in illegal actions.”

Circumstances 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 over £13,000 in a small bag, the court heard.

The money was said to have been from a collection to cover costs from arranging a large demonstration that took place the previous day in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Arguments

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

His barrister, Alisdair Williamson KC, argued in closing submissions that counter-terrorism police who stopped his client had engaged in a speculative search” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Referring to evidence from officers who stated they contacted other organizations” after detaining Robinson, Williamson 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.

He asserted the officers’ intervention 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 officers had used an “extraordinary power that must be carefully regulated” to try to discover information that was already known. The barrister suggested that Robinson journeyed to the resort regularly, which should have lessened the officers’ concerns about him.

Expenses and Verdict Date

Robinson stated that his court expenses in the case were being covered by Elon Musk, the owner of social media and electric car companies, who has appeared as an supporter of the far-right activist and recently spoke at a gathering arranged by him in the capital via a livestream.

A proposed day of the following Tuesday for the verdict was changed by the district judge, the judge, after the defense said his client was due to be a guest of the Israeli government 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 Williamson.

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