Army Instructors Sentenced for Sexual Abuse of Teenage Recruit
Two British Army instructors have been handed prison sentences and dismissed from military service after being convicted of sexual activity with a 17-year-old recruit. The court martial heard disturbing evidence of degrading messages and grooming behaviour that violated strict military regulations.
Degrading Conduct and Violation of Trust
Lance Sergeant Antony Pugh, 36, and Sergeant Connor Forgan, 32, both formed separate sexual relationships with the teenage trainee while serving as instructors at Catterick training establishment in North Yorkshire. The court heard they exchanged what a military judge described as 'disgraceful, indecent, and misogynistic' messages about the recruit, referring to her as a 'little hotty' and 'naked maid'.
Assistant Judge Advocate General Jane England condemned their behaviour during sentencing, stating that both men had 'preyed upon a vulnerable young recruit' and knowingly violated the strict rules prohibiting fraternisation between instructors and trainees.
Grooming Behaviour and Power Imbalance
The court heard particularly disturbing details about Pugh's conduct, which the judge determined amounted to grooming. Despite the recruit expressing reluctance to meet, Pugh proceeded to her accommodation block with condoms and lubricant. The victim later required STD and pregnancy testing, and suffered an internal injury following their encounter.
Commander Edward Hannah, prosecuting, emphasised the significant power imbalance, stating: 'The hierarchical structure of the military places power with rank, especially in a training facility.' He described the victim as a 'vulnerable child' who was 'upset and lonely' during her training.
Military Justice and Consequences
Following their court martial at Bulford Military Court in Wiltshire, both soldiers were found guilty of having sex with a child in breach of a position of trust. LSgt Pugh received a 20-month prison sentence while Sgt Forgan was sentenced to 16 months. Both men have been dismissed from the Army and placed on the sexual offenders register.
Judge England highlighted the broader implications of their actions, noting: 'A female recruit choosing to go into a combat role and being targeted by her instructors in phase two training will have a chilling effect on other female recruits.'
Defence Arguments and Victim Impact
During mitigation, defence representatives presented contrasting arguments. Rachel Beckett, representing Pugh, noted his positive references and lack of recent criminal convictions, while Beverley Cripps, representing Forgan, argued the victim couldn't be considered vulnerable and claimed no grooming had occurred.
The victim herself chose not to provide a personal statement, indicating she 'just wished to move on' from the traumatic experience. Both defendants continued to deny having sex with the recruit despite overwhelming evidence presented during the trial.
Broader Implications for Military Training
The case has raised serious questions about safeguarding within military training establishments. Both instructors had served in Afghanistan - Pugh with the Grenadier Guards and Forgan with the Welsh Guards - yet violated fundamental principles of military conduct.
Judge England emphasised that instructors 'set the tone for the rest of the recruit's career' and that their actions represented a fundamental betrayal of the trust placed in training personnel. The strict prohibition on sexual relations between trainers and trainees exists specifically to prevent such abuses of power within the military hierarchy.
