🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives informed the court that police maintained valid concerns that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's mobile contained material related to acts of terrorism when they detained him in the previous year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Give Device Password

The right-wing campaigner, whose legal name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, reportedly declined to hand over his password to police, claiming it contained journalist content.” This happened after he was stopped at the Channel tunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Claims on Anti-Terror Authority

On the last day of the proceedings, prosecutor Jo Morris argued that the counter-terrorism powers employed by police are intended to allow intelligence gathering. She asserted that officers had valid grounds to think the defendant continued to have links 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 disappeared. He is recognized for holding those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his telephone there could be information relevant to acts of terrorism,” she told the court.

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

Circumstances of the Stop

The campaigner had turned up by himself at the Channel tunnel in a silver Bentley owned by a friend and was on his way to the Spanish resort of Benidorm with more than £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial heard.

The funds was reportedly from a donation drive to offset expenses from organizing a major rally that occurred the day before in a London landmark.

Defense Submissions

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

His lawyer, defense counsel, said in final arguments that anti-terror officers who detained his client had engaged in a speculative search” and that he had been illegally held.

Citing evidence from officers who stated they called “partner agencies” after arresting him, the defense lawyer claimed this was a allusion to the security services and that lack of proof had been offered from MI5 to suggest his defendant was a security threat.

He said the police action was “discriminatory” because it was based to a “significant degree on a protected characteristic.” He stated that the “predominant influence” on the decision 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 proposed that his client traveled to the resort regularly, which should have reduced the police concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Date

Robinson stated 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 rally arranged by him in London via a online broadcast.

A proposed day of next Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the magistrate, the judge, after Williamson explained Robinson was due to be a invitee of the Israel's administration 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.

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