Decland Madigan has been hauled before the courts again. With more than 100 convictions the 16-year-old is one of Nottingham’s most persistent young offenders. His name provokes a range of reactions.
Matt Laddin and Rebecca Sherdley of the Evening Post took a closer look at Madigan – and why the paper continues to name him.

This week the Post won the right to lift reporting restrictions on Madigan following yet another crime spree.

Senior judges agree that society has a right to know the name Madigan, and the threat it represents. To date he has committed more than 100 offences.

This month he had cases running in both Nottingham Youth Court and Nottingham Crown Court.

At youth court he pleaded guilty to 15 offences, including some of his most serious – dangerous driving, threatening behaviour and possession of cannabis. And at crown court last week he pleaded guilty to criminal damage.

All Madigan’s crimes were committed while he was subject to an anti-social behaviour order first imposed when he was just 14.

It made him the youngest person in Britain to be hit with such a ban.

It aimed to prevent him taking or driving a motor vehicle, using threatening behaviour, or going onto any property within 1,200 metres of his home address.

In the last two years he has shown total disregard for the order, and has admitted breaching it ten times.

This month at youth court District Judge Mervyn Harris described Madigan’s record as one of the worst he had ever seen.

Sentencing him to an eight-month detention and training order, he said: “You have what is a very, very bad record. There can be very few people that have as bad a record as you.”

This time round Madigan pleaded guilty to charges including dangerous driving, driving whilst disqualified, and using a motor vehicle without a licence.

The identity of any teenager appearing in Nottingham Youth Court is protected by law.

The reporting restrictions, imposed by the Home Office, are designed to protect the young and vulnerable.

The Post fully supports these guidelines – challenging them only when a young criminal is a proven threat to society.

The case of Decland Madigan is one of those occasions.

And this is the third time senior judges have backed the Post’s call to name Madigan.

In court we argued that the offending was so serious and persistent his name had to be in the public domain – it was the only way to protect the community.

At the age of 14 Madigan was hit with an anti-social behaviour order and since then he has broken the order no less than ten times.

Judges also agreed when the Post argued an ASBO was ineffective if an offender’s identity was unknown.

District Judge Mervyn Harris said in Nottingham Youth Court this month: “The public has a legitimate interest in knowing he is the subject of such an order.

“They have a right to know when an order is being breached, so they can prevent themselves from being victims. They can only do that if he has been identified.”