Kevin Edward Hughes, 30, used his position in ‘a breach of trust of the worst kind’ to enter into what Judge Alan Parker called a ‘grotesque association’ with the pupil.
At Warwick Crown Court, prosecutor Richard Franck said Hughes began by asking the teenager to email him photographs after a school trip. Regular texts and e-mails followed, signed with kisses, which later progressed to them ‘French kissing’.
The girl’s mother became suspicious and, after finding his number in her daughter’s phone, warned Hughes to leave her alone.
However, the relationship resumed and when the mother warned she would report him, Hughes threatened that she did not want her daughter’s name ‘dragged through the mud’.
The mother still informed the school yet the relationship continued, the court heard.
But when the girl found an indecent image of a child on Hughes’ computer, a complaint was eventually made and he was arrested.
Judge Parker said: “He groomed her and corrupted her. I will not use the word relationship because that dignifies a deeply repellent association.
“Because of careful grooming, she must have thought she was in love with you and that’s what you wanted her to think.
“You were engaged in a grotesque association with this girl in flagrant disregard of your professional responsibilities.”
Mr Franck said police discovered over 1,300 indecent images of children, including four pictures of the two of them naked in bed, on Hughes’ computer.
David Jackson, defending, said Hughes, who was sacked from his most recent post at Lyndon School, had demonstrated ‘an interest in teenage females’.
The disgraced teacher, of Woodclose Road, Chelmsley Wood, admitted two charges of sexual activity with a child and four of making indecent pictures of children. He denied having sex with the pupil until she turned 16.
He was disqualified from working with children for life and to sign the sex offender register for five years.
He was also handed a three year community order, which includes a three-year sex offender programme.
Judge Parker told the defendant he had given the order to ‘better protect the public from you.’
“I make it clear, I should have liked to send you to prison and then make you subject to the order but I can’t do both.
“I hope you will realise that you need a great deal of help.”