Tommy Robinson's harassment case against Cambridgeshire Constabulary went into its third and looks set to conclude on Friday.

Robinson is suing Cambridge police after he was allegedly harassed by officers on the night of a Luton Town FC away match at Cambridge United.

Robinson was told to leave the Grain and Hop Store pub on August 27, 2016 or face being given a dispersal order or be arrested.

The right-wing activist told the court on Tuesday (March 12) that he had been at the pub with his three children and was only drinking water.

He said it had been "humiliating" to have been made to leave the pub by the police in front of his children.

He also said that he was followed by police officers after leaving the pub, which he claims terrified his youngest daughter to such an extent that it caused her to run out into a busy road and to be "almost killed" by a bus.

The civil case is being heard at Peterborough County Council.

Cambridgeshire police officers said they had identified Robinson as being part of a group of 'risk supporters' - football fans who have a high risk of causing violence on match days, which was the reason why they made him leave the pub.

Tommy Robinson arrives for his hearing at Peterborough County Court

The officers also said it was common practice to follow those removed from a pub to make sure they didn't just enter another pub down the road or circle back to the one they had just been in.

On Thursday, the court heard from the final witness in the trial, PC Steve Mason, a football spotter from Bedfordshire police.

His job was to work with Cambridgeshire police officers to identify which of the Luton fans could cause trouble that evening. He has also known Robinson in his role as a police officer for over 14 years.

1. PC Mason says Robinson was not 'someone he needed to keep an eye on'

During questioning by Robinson's lawyer Allison Gurden's PC Mason told the court he had not felt he was going to be a risk.

PC Mason said he was aware that Robinson was at the game, having seen him with children before the match had started.

He said that he had known Robinson for 14 years and had "no cause to speak to him" at football matches because he didn't cause trouble.

During questioning by Adam Clemens, representing Cambridgeshire Constabulary,  the officer said that Robinson had gotten angry when asked by police to leave.

Mr Clemens pointed out that in an email PC Mason had sent answering questions about the incident he had written that when a group of supporters had been told they had to drink up and leave the pub by 6.30pm they had all seemed annoyed.

Mr Clemens than asked PC Mason if that included Robinson, to which PC Mason said it had.

2. Mr Clemens objects to PC Mason giving an opinion on whether or not Robinson was a risk that night

At this point HHJ Walden-Smith asked PC Mason to temporarily leave the court while the matter was discussed.

Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, poses for a photo outside Peterborough County Court where he is suing Cambridgeshire Police for harassment.

3. Police sum up with dictionary definition of 'harassment' 

Mr Clemens, defending the police gave his submissions this afternoon, while Ms Gurden will give her submissions on Friday morning (March 15).

In his summary, Mr Clemens said that there was no way Robinson had been harassed, as only a single incident had been brought up in the court.

He said that every English definition of the word harassment involved more than one incident.

He also said that the part where Robinson talked about the police officers following him had scared Robinson's youngest daughter so much that she had ran into the path of a bus never happened.

He said that no evidence had been presented to prove that it had.

You can find out what Ms Gurden, Robinson's lawyer, will say in her summary on our live blog of the court case tomorrow morning.

4. The judge had to leave early to speak at a school

Finally, the reason why Ms Gurden didn't give her submissions to the court was because HHJ Walden-Smith had another engagement.

She did say that if Ms Gurden wanted to give her submission that afternoon she could and that she would cancel a talk she was giving at a school in Suffolk.

However, after talking with her client, Ms Gurden said that she was happy to give her submission tomorrow morning so that the judge could give her talk at the school.

The trial will resume tomorrow morning at 11.30am.

You can read live updates from the day one of the trial, day two and day three by clicking the links.

Alternatively, you can read the talking points of day one and two here.