Bermuda Regiment should not have tried to hush-up the attempted rape of a soldier in Grenada, according to a conscript who was on the 2005 hurricane-relief trip.The man, who asked not to be named, told The Royal Gazette he was “disgusted” that the Regiment claimed in 2009 to have had no reports of sexual misconduct since 2002.This newspaper asked the Regiment directly about the Grenada incident in September 2009 after investigating and uncovering 14 allegations of sexual assault or harassment made by male soldiers at Warwick Camp between 1989 and 2002.But then public relations officer Major George Jones refused to comment.The former soldier said “everybody” on the Grenada trip knew a private had assaulted another private at knifepoint and that the incident was sexual.“I am disgusted by the Regiment’s insistence that there have not been any instances of sexual assault within the Regiment since 2002,” he said.“It baffles me that the Regiment had no idea the incident was already public knowledge. The perpetrator was sentenced to some time in the Regiment lock-up on his return to Bermuda and then released back onto an unsuspecting public.“The alleged victim was given a discharge from the Regiment, presumably to keep him quiet.”The man said he was upset when Lieutenant Colonel Edward Lamb, who was commanding officer (CO), described the incident publicly at the time as “minor”.“[It] is no easier to be reminded of it today,” he added.The man questioned why the victim was discharged but not the offender.“Surely that’s a question he [current CO Brian Gonsalves] should be able to answer and is relevant to the conscription issue because, in most any other army, that would have earned him a dishonourable discharge to protect the other serving soldiers, if for no other reason.“But, under conscription, a dishonourable discharge is something almost everyone would love to get. This forces them to keep a whole menagerie of undesirables up there and handling live weapons to boot.”Another former soldier who was on the Grenada trip told this newspaper: “While there was, indeed, an accusation of sexual intent concerning the assault, made by the victim, it was my understanding that there was insufficient grounds forensic, witnesses, etc to pursue that investigation.“While it is possible that the Regimental Police were, at that time, insufficiently prepared to deal with such an event, I understand that has changed now.“That change is not necessarily an admission that the accusation of assault was legitimate, but rather a result of preparation for future events, should they happen.”Lt Col Gonsalves said in a statement yesterday the victim was discharged to avoid the two soldiers having to cross paths while serving in the Regiment.“The discharged soldier had a very short period of service remaining in any event,” he said.The CO said the incident was only recently classified by the Regiment as a sexual assault.