Key Highlights
- Tommy Robinson found not guilty of terror charge over border stop in 2025.
- R Robinson, real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, was stopped at Channel Tunnel while driving a Bentley.
- Court proceedings lasted three weeks due to Robinson’s trip to Israel.
- Robinson refused to provide police access to his iPhone under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act.
The Controversial Case of Tommy Robinson
Tommy Robinson, a controversial far-right figure, has emerged victorious in a legal battle that saw him found not guilty on Tuesday, November 4, 2025. The case centered around an incident where Robinson was stopped by police at the Channel Tunnel while driving his Bentley to Benidorm.
Stop and Search Incident
R Robinson faced charges under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act after being detained by officers on July 28, 2024. The act allows police to stop anyone passing through a UK port “to determine whether they may be involved or concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism.” Robinson’s car was found to contain thousands of pounds in cash, and he was recognized by law enforcement.
Legal Challenges and Trial Proceedings
The legal process took a significant turn when Robinson postponed his trial due to a pre-planned trip to Israel. This led to a three-week delay as the case went through various stages. During this period, Robinson claimed that billionaire Elon Musk had covered the legal costs of “this absolute state persecution.”
Defence and Prosecution Arguments
The prosecution argued that Robinson’s demeanor was suspicious, with him giving vague replies to police questions. However, Robinson’s defence team contended that his stop was discriminatory based on his known views. Alisdair Williamson KC, representing Robinson, emphasized that the stop and detention were unlawful as they appeared to be based solely on Robinson’s association with controversial views.
Verdict and Aftermath
District Judge Sam Goozee delivered the verdict on Tuesday, finding Tommy Robinson not guilty of failing to comply with counter-terrorism powers. The judge highlighted that there was no substantial evidence linking Robinson to any terrorism activities. Despite the charges being dropped, the case has drawn significant attention due to Robinson’s high-profile status and controversial background.
The outcome of this legal battle underscores the complexities in handling cases involving individuals associated with far-right politics and the challenges faced by law enforcement in balancing civil liberties with national security concerns.
