Mark Broadhurst, 28, a British Army chef from Chesterfield, has been sentenced to three years and ten months in prison after admitting explosives and firearms offences that a judge ruled were connected to terrorism. Police discovered a homemade cannon, gunpowder and an assortment of weapons after investigating his extreme right-wing activities, which included discussions about forming an armed militia.
Homemade cannon and explosives discovered
Broadhurst was arrested on 25 September 2024 at Catterick Garrison in North Yorkshire, where he was serving as an Army chef.
The arrest followed an investigation by Counter Terrorism Policing North East into his communications with individuals involved in extreme right-wing groups.
Searches of his home in Chesterfield and his military accommodation uncovered an extensive collection of weapons and potentially dangerous materials.
Among the discoveries were a crude homemade cannon, black powder, 9mm ammunition, air pistols, rifles, crossbows and knives.
The improvised cannon, constructed using a pipe attached to a piece of wood, was described in court as resembling an early firearm.
Investigators also uncovered evidence that Broadhurst had been obtaining components used to produce explosive substances.
He pleaded guilty to possessing a firearm without a certificate and making or possessing an explosive substance under suspicious circumstances.
Judge rejects denial of terrorist motivation
Although Broadhurst admitted the weapons offences, he disputed the prosecution’s argument that they were connected to terrorism.
Following a separate hearing, Mr Justice Hilliard rejected his position.
The judge concluded that Broadhurst possessed the firearm and gunpowder partly to make his threats of serious violence credible to members of extreme right-wing groups whose ideology he wanted to advance.
Broadhurst was sentenced at Sheffield Crown Court on Wednesday, 14 October 2026, receiving a prison term of 46 months and a ten-year notification order.
Links to three convicted far-right terrorists
Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the investigation was Broadhurst’s prolonged contact with three men subsequently convicted of planning terrorist violence.
According to the Crown Prosecution Service, Broadhurst had communicated for almost two years with Christopher Ringrose, Brogan Stewart and Marco Pitzettu through Facebook and Telegram.
The men shared extremist views, including racist and supremacist ideology.
In 2025, Ringrose, Stewart and Pitzettu received sentences totalling 29 years after being convicted of offences relating to plans for terrorist attacks targeting Jewish and Muslim communities in northern England.
Prosecutors described the three men as influenced by Nazi SS tactics and white supremacist beliefs.
There is no established finding that Broadhurst participated in their terrorist attack planning. His conviction concerned his own weapons and explosives offences, which the court found had a terrorist connection.
Nevertheless, his sustained involvement in the same extremist circles formed an important part of the evidence against him.
Violent rhetoric and plans for a militia
Broadhurst’s online communications revealed hostility towards Black, Asian, Muslim and Jewish communities.
Prosecutors told the court that he had expressed interest in violent social upheaval, discussed creating an armed militia and made disturbing comments about terrorism and killing police officers.
His activity included displaying weapons-related interests and sharing details of materials purchased to make gunpowder.
Counter-terrorism investigators said the evidence showed an extreme right-wing mindset alongside practical efforts to obtain weapons and explosive components.
Detective Chief Superintendent James Dunkerley, head of Counter Terrorism Policing North East, said the investigation demonstrated that Broadhurst was engaging extensively with like-minded extremists.
The officer welcomed the sentence and said the court’s finding reflected the danger Broadhurst posed.
How did Broadhurst enter the British Army?
The case raises a separate and important question concerning military recruitment and security screening.
According to prosecuting counsel Matthew Donkin KC, most of the activity surrounding Broadhurst’s offending took place before he joined the British Army.
That means the case is not simply about a soldier developing extremist views while serving. It also raises questions about whether his earlier activities could have been identified during recruitment and security checks.
The evidence presented in court does not establish that military recruiters knew about his extremist communications, or that any particular vetting procedure failed.
However, the fact that a man with this background subsequently served in the armed forces makes the adequacy of those safeguards a legitimate matter of public interest.
In mitigation, defence barrister Jim Littlehales presented a reference from one of Broadhurst’s superior officers praising his professional conduct and his mentoring of junior catering staff.
His defence also said that the homemade firearm had not been used to threaten anyone directly.
The Army condemned the ideology revealed during the case. An Army spokesperson said:
There is absolutely no place in the British Army for racist or extremist ideology.
The spokesperson added that such beliefs were incompatible with the Army’s values and could pose a serious national security risk.
A warning about extremist networks
Frank Ferguson, head of the Crown Prosecution Service’s Special Crime and Counter Terrorism Division, said Broadhurst had demonstrated a clear interest in violence and weapons capable of seriously harming innocent people.
Ferguson also highlighted his prolonged association with the three convicted terrorists.
The case illustrates how violent extremist rhetoric can coexist with attempts to acquire or manufacture dangerous weapons.
It also leaves questions about how effectively the armed forces can identify extremist activity that predates military service.
Broadhurst’s prison sentence brings the criminal proceedings to a conclusion. Whether his case prompts further scrutiny of military recruitment and vetting remains to be seen.
