Trial Opens as Tommy Robinson Claims Elon Musk Is Paying His Legal Costs
The trial at Westminster magistrates court started with a claim that Elon Musk is covering the legal costs for far-right activist Tommy Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley Lennon. Robinson faces charges related to refusals to comply with counter-terrorism police requests as he attempted to leave Britain last year.
Robinson arrived alone at the Channel Tunnel in a silver Bentayga belonging to a friend and was travelling toward the Spanish resort of Benidorm with more than £13,000 in a small bag. Prosecutors described this trip as the first day of a case that centers on whether he complied with a request to hand over a phone pin.
According to police, Robinson claimed the phone’s contents included “journalistic material.” He reportedly told officers he was white English but was using an Irish passport and had been living in Spain. The police questioned his vague answers and invoked Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act to gain access to the phone to determine if he might be involved in or connected to terrorism-related activity.
In a pre-trial video, Robinson said, “Thankfully, I haven’t had to beg for donations today because Elon Musk has picked up the legal bill for this absolute state persecution.” The claim has since prompted attempts to confirm whether Musk is indeed funding the defence. Musk has been contacted for comment, and there is no confirmed public statement from his representatives at this time.
What happened at the Channel Tunnel?
Opening statements described how officers became concerned about Robinson’s demeanor after he drove into a police inspection area alone. When asked for the phone pin, he allegedly replied with a challenging phrase, “Not a chance, bruv … You look like cunts so you ain’t having it.” Robinson later indicated to Folkestone police that the device might contain information about vulnerable girls he had discussed in his journalistic reporting on grooming gangs.
Counter-terrorism officers, including PC Mitchell Thorogood who was present at Folkestone, testified that the Bentley Bentayga’s appearance, a vehicle seen as high-value and high-visibility, drew attention. The defence questioned whether the use of such a vehicle would be typical for a terrorist, while noting that crime and security professionals must consider a wide range of possibilities when assessing risk.
Defense and prosecution perspectives
The defence, led by barrister Alisdair Williamson KC, suggested the stop could have been discriminatory against Robinson’s political beliefs, arguing that the question of whether high-value vehicles are typical of terrorist activity should be scrutinized. The prosecutor, Jo Morris, highlighted that Robinson had a history with the English Defence League, and the court heard that concerns about far-right ideologies and their potential threats remain relevant to public order policing.
District Judge Sam Goozee instructed that Robinson’s address should not be published due to credible threats, as the trial began with a planned two-day schedule. The proceedings were adjourned to continue on Tuesday as both sides prepare further arguments and evidence regarding the legality of the stop and the police’s request for access to the phone.
The case sits at the intersection of freedom of information, press activity, and public order policing, with broader implications for how counter-terrorism powers are applied in such scenarios. As the trial unfolds, observers will be watching to see how the court weighs the justification for the Stop under Schedule 7 against Robinson’s asserted journalistic activities and his political affiliations.
