Tommy Robinson

[Alex]

Tommy Robinson has been remanded in custody after handing himself in at a police station in Folkestone, Kent.

Robinson, 41, was charged with one count of failing to provide the PIN to his mobile phone under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000.

He will appear at Westminster Magistrates' Court on 13 November over the charge but has been remanded in custody ahead of a separate contempt of court case on Monday.

Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, was due to lead a rally in London on Saturday.

Sky.

[JBR]

Failing to provide the PIN to his mobile phone?

Is this some sort of crime?  I am very interested to hear how this will pan out.  I hope that Tommy publishes all of what happens as a consequence to his arrest and his trial.  Should make national news.
It also occurs to me that we are becoming rather like Nazi Germany.

By coincidence, I am just watching a YouTube feature entitled, "Ex-Police Officer Harry Miller recalls when the police came to 'check his thinking'".  I am amazed at what the police are doing these days and how they seem to be getting away with it.

[Alex]

It was on Sky News.

[klondike]

You have to realise that we have a three tier justice system

1 Scumbags - ignore
2 Slightly right wing - jail
3 Tommy Robinson - constantly harass and jail

[Diasi]

Failing to provide the PIN to his mobile phone?

Is this some sort of crime? 

Yes.  Section 49 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 contains the relevant power, but this is only be enforced after an application to a Judge.

Refusal carries a 2 year prison sentence or a 5 year prison sentence if the request involved national security.

That's why he's been charged under the Terrorism Act.

And that's why so many of us don't trust the police, the Courts & the Judges.

[dextrous63]

So, if someone threw their mobile into the sea while crossing the English Channel (for example), could they be prosecuted under the same act?  

[Diasi]

So, if someone threw their mobile into the sea while crossing the English Channel (for example), could they be prosecuted under the same act? 

An interesting question & in theory I imagine they could be charged with obstruction if they'd been told that the police wanted to check their phone on arrival.

In reality I very much doubt it as they'd have to say that they deliberately disposed of it.

[dextrous63]

An interesting question & in theory I imagine they could be charged with obstruction if they'd been told that the police wanted to check their phone on arrival.

In reality I very much doubt it as they'd have to say that they deliberately disposed of it.

True.  The irony is that if someone were to video fellow "passengers" deliberately throwing their phones into the sea, then that video itself would be lost since that phone would also be chucked overboard.  🤣🤣🤣

[JBR]

So, if someone threw their mobile into the sea while crossing the English Channel (for example), could they be prosecuted under the same act? 

Of course they 'accidentally' drop their phones into the sea.  If they were to be examined, they would provide the nationality of the invader and that would permit direct return to their country of origin.
Not that the Toolmaker's Son would actually return them, of course.  Valuable future Labour voters.