https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/upl ... Lennon.pdfThe police and the CPS, the state all to blame!!!
Summary of Key Evidence of Abuse of Power and Persecution in R v Stephen Lennon
The judgment in Tommy Robinson’s (Stephen Lennon’s) trial under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000 reveals significant police misconduct, procedural failures, and apparent political targeting, leading to his acquittal. Below are the key items demonstrating abuse of power and persecution, drawn directly from the court’s findings:
• Arbitrary and Prejudiced Selection for Stop: PC Thorogood identified Lennon as the driver within 34 seconds of the vehicle entering the lane, based solely on prior media knowledge of his identity and involvement in a right wing assembly the previous day. No new information from passport or vehicle checks influenced the decision, no suspicion of wrongdoing and selection criteria were never documented, indicating the stop was not based on objective risk but on Lennon’s known political activism.
• Failure to Follow Documentation and Recording Procedures: Officers (PCs Thorogood, Stride, and PS Farmer) did not record essential details, such as the exact questions asked, topics covered, or the timing of the shift from routine stop to Schedule 7 detention. This violated standard procedures, rendering their evidence unreliable and suggesting an intentional lack of transparency to cover procedural lapses.
• Inconsistent and Embellished Evidence from Officers: PC Thorogood’s lied in court and was contradicted by body-worn video, where Lennon’s responses to a single question about his travel purpose were described as “short vague answers to multiple questions.” Officers admitted having “no real recollection” of the examination content, further eroding credibility and implying fabrication or exaggeration to justify the detention.
• Unexplained Delays Indicating Lack of Urgency: Over 40 minutes elapsed from the initial stop to formal detention, including a 22-minute unexplained hold at the booth before invoking Schedule 7 powers. No justification was provided, breaching the requirement for “expeditious” exercise of anti-terrorism powers and suggesting the process was prolonged unnecessarily, as the officers coordinated with superiors and other agencies to exact pressure on Lennon.
• Political Bias Over Terrorism Concerns: The examination focused almost exclusively on Lennon’s political views, right wing associations, and travel to Spain with no questions probing actual terrorism risks (e.g., explosives, funding, or recruitment). PS Farmer explicitly cited “far-right links” as a concern, showing the stop was driven by protected characteristics (political beliefs) rather than statutory anti-terrorism purpose, amounting to discriminatory persecution.
• Unlawful Purpose and Discrimination: The court could not confirm the “true and dominant purpose” was to assess terrorism involvement under section 40(1)(b), due to the absence of any terrorism-related inquiries and heavy reliance on political profiling. This raised “real concerns” of unlawful discrimination, rendering the entire examination invalid and highlighting a serious misuse of broad Schedule 7 powers against a vocal critic of the state.
Overall Outcome: Lennon was acquitted; the prosecution failed to prove the stop and examination lawful beyond reasonable doubt. The judge ruled the officers’ evidence “vague and unsatisfactory,” and explicitly found Robinson was targeted “because of what you stood for and your political beliefs”—a clear breach of non-discrimination. The CPS, fully aware the stop was unlawful, pressed charges anyway, revealing persecution extending beyond the police to the heart of the state.
Login
Register
FAQ
