The owner of a Brighton business has been jailed for three years after he attacked three students who were trespassing on his premises.
One of victims suffered a broken eye socket in what a judge said was a nasty attack and a terrifying ordeal involving the use of excessive violence.
Darryl Pledge, the founder and managing director of the Brighton Community Compost Centre, in Stanmer Park, was convicted by a jury of assault causing grievous bodily harm (GBH) with intent.
He was also found guilty of two counts of assault causing actual bodily harm (ABH) at his five-day trial at Brighton Crown Court last month.
Bill Gatward, prosecuting, told Hove Crown Court today (Monday 20 November) that Pledge, 52, used a metal rod, possibly a golf club, to attack two of his victims. It was not self-defence.
Olivia Ham and Isabella Brien were 18 or 19-year-old women who were running away from him when he struck them. Olivia Ham had welts and bruises on her leg.
Pledge, of The Twitten, Southwick, knocked another teenage student, Joseph Read, to the floor and punched him so hard that he left Mr Read with a fractured eye socket.
Mr Gatward said that Pledge had previous convictions for violence including headbutting someone after a crash and punching two people in the face when a removals lorry blocked his path.
The prosecutor cited a probation report saying that the defendant had a propensity to violence, which he had not addressed, and was at risk of committing further violent offences.
William England, defending, said that if Pledge had come across as arrogant and aggressive during his probation interview, that gave a false impression of a caring man and responsible employer.
Mr England said: “Those young students should not have been at that premises. They should not have been crawling around on that expensive equipment.
“He (Pledge) thought that there were burglars on site and it’s the reason he went down there. He was outnumbered.”
There were five students in all and, Mr England said, he did not wish to denigrate the students but they had all been drinking and were clambering on hazardous machinery.
He added: “It was a pitch-black site and a very dangerous site (and) he went over the top. They’d had problems with the likes of burglars down there before.”
Pledge, who runs Sussex Waste Services as well as the Brighton Community Compost Centre, was outnumbered, in the dark and over-reacted, Mr England said.
The barrister told the court that Pledge had the stress of running five businesses and said: “There is a business loan of some £200,000 outstanding so he’s in a substantial hole and that hole will now get bigger because the business will fold.”
Recorder Claire McCann said: “On Saturday 4 December 2021, at around 10pm, the alarm was set off at your place of business within the Stammer Park woods area.
“Five students, including the three victims, Ms Ham, Ms Brien and Mr Read, had got bored and gone out to explore Stanmer Park behind the students’ halls of residence.
“They were only 18 or 19 years old. They happened upon your recycling/logging site and were mucking around when you arrived with one of your business associates. They should not have been there – they were trespassing.
“It was dark. You parked up and ran past the gates and down the hill towards where you saw the students’ torches.
“In my judgment, the evidence showed beyond any reasonable doubt that, when you came across the students, you had a long, thin metal object in your hand, possibly a metal stake or a golf club.
“Your arrival on the scene surprised the students and the two young women (Ms Ham and Ms Brien) screamed and turned and ran.
“You swung at each of them in turn with the metal rod that you had in your hand. You made contact with each of them in turn, on the back of Ms Ham’s leg and on the side of Ms Brien’s.
“The bruising and welt to Ms Ham’s leg was especially bad. You caused ABH to them both and this was not in self-defence.
“You then came upon Mr Read. You subjected him to a nasty attack, whereby you punched him several times in the face, in the process knocking him to the ground.
“You then got on top of Mr Read and held something to his neck which he thought was a knife.
“While your attention was diverted by one of the other students, Mr Read managed to make his escape.
“The injury to Mr Read was so nasty that he had to attend hospital for treatment.
“He sustained a fracture to his left eye socket and suffered swelling to his face and jaw, with bruising, and had difficulty opening his mouth and eating for some weeks.
“Your behaviour shows poor emotional control, use of excessive violence and aggression and a lack of consequential thinking. It is marked by recklessness and risk-taking.
“You attended the police station voluntarily and … you claimed that Joseph Read was the aggressor, that he had attacked you first and that you were acting in reasonable self-defence.
“The jury made it clear by their verdicts that they did not believe you.
“It was clear from their evidence that the students’ ordeal at your hands was terrifying for them. Ms Ham and Ms Brien were clearly still very upset by the events when they gave evidence nearly two years later.
“You have some previous convictions for violent offending against strangers where you have lost control in situations where you feel irritated or wronged.
“These convictions are, however, not especially recent, dating back to 2014 and 2018, but they do show your tendency to resort to violence when stressed or angry.
“As for mitigation, I accept that you were reacting to intruders who had unlawfully come on to your business property and where you were concerned that they might be intent upon stealing or causing criminal damage.
“That provides some mitigation but in no way justifies or excuses your violence that night.”
Recorder McCann added: “I am troubled by your violent reactions to certain situations you have found yourself in.”
She said: “In my view, the circumstances of these offences, involving three different victims, are so serious that only custodial sentences can be justified.
“I do not consider that a community order would provide sufficient punishment … The offences are so serious that neither fines nor community sentences can be justified.”
Pledge was jailed for three years and one month for assault causing GBH with intent – and for four weeks for each of the ABH offences.”
Recorder McCann added: “I have imposed concurrent sentences so the overall sentence is three years and one month. This is the least that can be imposed to mark the seriousness of these three offences.”
Well they won’t go trespassing again will they?
Nor will Darryl be pledging to beat them
I refer you to my earlier reply.
F around and find out.
Yes choosing violence is not a good thing but considering the amount of machinery and equipment that gets stolen daily in Sussex and I can understand why he did what he did. Should CPS have pursued it? No. They were trespassing. They shouldn’t have been there to begin with on the wrong site of the fences.
And yet here we are, a violent thug behind bars with his business prospects looking slim. Looks like you’re wrong on all counts, from identifying which party ‘found out’, to whether CPS should have pursued it (spoiler alert, they did and they won).
Totally agree this guy should not be jailed students have caused so much trouble in our area screaming all night alcohol bottles everywhere takeaway rubbish up and down our street they have no respect for locals trying to go about there business they should not have been at this guys premises disgrace he got jailed business will collapse probably got kids right before Xmas not fair hope it’s a lesson for students to show more respect
British Courts Protect Criminals
Trespass is usually a civil matter. It’s only criminal in certain circumstances. And this doesn’t appear to be one of them
https://www.milnerslaw.co.uk/trespassing-law-in-the-uk
What should he have done? There would have been no point in calling the police, as they would be unlikely to respond. His reaction was clearly far too violent, but they were trespassing, and to have just let them get away with it would also have been wrong.
He could have told them to leave.
Get away with what- what utter drivel
Most of Stanmer Park is free to access so I can understand why they might have been in this area. I very much doubt they had the intention of stealing anything… just out for a late night walk.
His actions in hitting them, particularly the women is cowardly, unjustified and disgraceful.
He could’ve simply asked them to leave.
I hope he finds the accommodation at HMP Lewes as welcoming as the way he treated those defenceless students.
Well said!
Amazing the amount of people defending an aggressive thug with a long history of violent behaviour. Sure the students shouldn’t have been there, that doesn’t give him the right to violently assault all 3 of them, none of his actions were in self defence.
One of these girls is my niece and the students were walking thro Stanmer park from an evening out together and not tresspassing.
These men came out out the woods at them and attacked them. My niece’s legs were a mess from the full force of a metal bar and trumatised.
I really hope he watches his back in prison
I’m sure the niece wouldn’t lie when being caught trespassing. After all business owners do tend to hang out in bushes at night ready to attack strangers.
Of course you would stick up for her… trespassing is trespassing. How do you know “they were just walking through Stanmer Park and not trespassing” were you with them?
They deserved what they got to be fair but I do not condone what he did.
Absolute lie, didn’t you read the news report ?
I do not agree with his actions and he could of dealt with this differently. But………
They were in the middle of a processing centre climbing on a JCB telehandler, drinking and (not confirmed) smoking weed. Two vehicles pulled up and they had plenty of time to walk away. It’s pitch dark up there !
Machinery in the past has been stolen.
A Transit van has been stolen and when found to be on eBay, the police decided to do nothing about it.
Diesel is constantly stolen and one person was caught, the police was called and they dropped the charges.
Stock is constantly stolen.
Vandalism of windows being smash on vehicles.
Trespassers constantly walk through.
Dog walkers let their dogs roam free and leave the dog shit behind.
Three Boys were caught in the yard last month.
Since the incident the place is now fully alarmed with live cameras.
I’m so sorry for your neice, I hope she recovers soon, I think he should have got longer.
I guess when the police have a reputation for not responding and protecting criminals, people end up solving problems themselves! Some people may be prone to overreact in these high stress situations, especially when outnumbered. Drunks youths decided to trespass and play around on expensive equipment and now a man has 3 years of his life stolen for overreacting in the moment trying to protect his livelihood. Not only 3 years from his live, but his multiple businesses likely to fold, employees to lose their jobs that their families may depend on. All because some kids thought it would be fun to break the law. This is a big reminder that both self defense and protecting ones property are not looked favorably upon in the UK. This isn’t America! His biggest mistake was turning himself in and trusting the justice system.
The “kids” weren’t breaking the law.
Whatever you may think trespass – except in limited circumstances of this isn’t one – a civil matter not a criminal one.
This fellow was all over dodgy, cash only for all deliveries and v non responsive, even aggressive through emails!
Nasty man
Yes very unprofessional operation from a business perspective. Seeing this article and I’m thinking “ah ok I get it now”.
And anyone who has been to stanmer park at night would know that finding your way onto a site like this isn’t difficult. You climb over a fence in the middle of some woods because there are some huge piles of wood chip and such… It’s not like they cut their way through a 12 ft fence with bolt cutters.
Why does the company take card payments then Deanna Sharp ?
In light of circumstances and history of theft and mischief in this area, plus the defendant being a businessman protectioning his livelihood at night, surely a community award or suspended sentence or both would havec been more appropriate. These ‘hooligans’ have ruined a life. Why would anyone be in that part of Stanmer at that time of night?
Because there is a university campus about 20 minutes walk from there? And walking in the woods is called exploring and, not everyone is afraid of the dark?
Locked enclosurss are there to be explored, right?
No wonder these pass for “students”, the standards are lower than nonexistent.
In light of circumstances and history of violent conduct, plus the defendant having previous, he’s rightly banged up.
The only person that’s ruined his life is him. The hope is that he will learn a lesson and perhaps put his fists down, the reality is that he’s probably blaming others just like you are.
Two wrongs don’t make a right.
Have you personally been to the scene?
It says private keep out!!!
Trespassing!!
A group on a cctv all in black and 6 of them how on earth do you expect someone to protect there livelyhood
Dominoes arrives quicker than the police these days.
A businessman who was defending his property as they broke entry !!
This country gives us no hope
We surprised two burglars in our house a few years back. My son came downstairs armed with a baseball bat. We called the police. Waste of time, couldn’t even find my stolen car, which we found abandoned around the corner.
If there’s a next time, and there probably will be, we will be using the baseball bat and not calling the police.
I don’t know the rights or wrongs or rights of the incident but I do know that Daryl Pledge was an absolute rock to me following my diagnosis with Prostate cancer and gave me great support during my radio therapy. The Darryl I know is kind, supportive and caring. I just don’t recognise some of the descriptions in the comments or court report.