🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives informed the tribunal that law enforcement maintained valid concerns that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's phone 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 Provide Phone Pin

The right-wing campaigner, whose legal name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, reportedly declined to provide his phone pin to police, stating it included journalist content.” This occurred after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on 28 July 2024.

Trial Claims on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the last day of the proceedings, prosecutor Jo Morris argued that the counter-terrorism powers employed by law enforcement are designed to permit intelligence gathering. She asserted that officers had reasonable suspicion to believe the defendant continued to have connections to far-right activists, even following the disbandment of the English Defence League (EDL).

“Although his affiliation of the English Defence League has come to an end, his beliefs have not disappeared. He is known for holding those opinions and therefore it is a valid concern to believe that on his phone there could be data pertaining to terrorist acts,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.

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

Details of the Detention

The activist had turned up alone at the Channel tunnel 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 small bag, the court heard.

The funds was said to have been from a donation drive to offset expenses from arranging a major rally that occurred the previous day in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Submissions

The defendant, who denies failing to comply with counter-terrorism powers during the encounter on July 28 of the previous year, faces up to 90 days in jail or a potential £2,500 fine if convicted.

His lawyer, defense counsel, argued in final arguments that counter-terrorism police who detained his client had engaged in a “fishing expedition” and that he had been illegally held.

Citing evidence from officers who said they called “partner agencies” after detaining him, Williamson claimed this was a reference to the security services and that lack of proof had been offered from the security service to indicate his defendant was a terrorist.

Williamson said the officers’ action was biased” because it was based to a large extent on a protected characteristic.” He stated that the main factor” on the choice to stop him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He added that officers had used an “extraordinary power that needs to be properly policed” to try to discover information that was previously available. Williamson suggested that his client journeyed to Benidorm regularly, which ought to have reduced the police suspicions about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Date

The activist stated that his court expenses in the proceedings were being paid for by Elon Musk, the owner of X and Tesla, who has emerged as an supporter of the campaigner and lately addressed a gathering arranged by him in London via a livestream.

A proposed day of the following Tuesday for the decision was changed by the magistrate, the judge, after Williamson explained his client was due to be a invitee of the Israel's administration 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,” said Williamson.

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