South Carolina inmate chooses to die by firing squad like condemned inmate before him

ABC News - Mar 28th, 2025

In South Carolina, Mikal Mahdi has chosen to be executed by firing squad, marking the second such execution in the state following Brad Sigmon's execution five weeks earlier. Mahdi, convicted for the 2004 murder of police officer James Myers, is scheduled to face the firing squad on April 11. This method involves three prison employees firing rifles from a distance of 15 feet, with a target placed on Mahdi's chest. The execution choice reflects the limited options available to Mahdi, which included lethal injection and the electric chair.

The use of a firing squad is rare in the United States, with only three other inmates — all in Utah — having been executed this way in the past 50 years. Sigmon's execution in March was the first by firing squad in the U.S. since 2010. The decision by Mahdi and Sigmon to die by bullets highlights the ongoing debate over execution methods and the ethics surrounding capital punishment. The story underscores the controversial nature of death row executions and the evolving legal and moral landscape in which they are carried out.

South Carolina Capital Punishment Mikal Mahdi Brad Sigmon Firing Squad Execution James Myers

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

6.8

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The news story provides a factual and timely account of a recent development in South Carolina's use of firing squads for executions. It accurately reports on the choice and circumstances of Mikal Mahdi's execution, while also placing the event in a historical context. However, the story would benefit from greater balance by including diverse perspectives and expert opinions on the ethical and legal implications of such execution methods. The article is well-written and easy to understand, but it lacks transparency in sourcing and methodology. Overall, it addresses a topic of significant public interest and has the potential to influence discussions on capital punishment, though its impact could be enhanced with a more comprehensive exploration of the issues involved.

Accuracy

The news story is largely accurate, with most claims verifiable through available sources. The article accurately reports that Mikal Mahdi chose to die by firing squad, a method recently used in South Carolina with Brad Sigmon. The story correctly states that Mahdi was convicted for the murder of a police officer in 2004, a fact supported by historical records. However, some details, such as the exact circumstances of the crime and the execution protocol specifics, need further verification to ensure precision. Overall, the story's factual basis is strong, but minor details require confirmation.

Balance

The article primarily presents the perspectives surrounding the execution choice and the historical context of firing squad executions. However, it lacks a broader discussion on the ethical implications of such execution methods or the viewpoints of human rights advocates. The story could benefit from including perspectives from legal experts or human rights organizations to provide a more balanced view of the issues at hand.

Clarity

The article is clearly written, with a logical flow and straightforward language that makes the information accessible to readers. The structure effectively presents the key facts and details in a coherent manner. However, the story could benefit from further elaboration on certain aspects, such as the historical context of firing squad executions, to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the topic.

Source quality

The article appears to rely on credible sources for its information, such as legal records and historical data on executions. However, the story does not explicitly cite these sources or include direct quotes from officials or experts, which would enhance its credibility. Including statements from the Department of Corrections or legal representatives would improve the perceived reliability of the information presented.

Transparency

The article lacks transparency in terms of sourcing and methodology. It does not disclose how the information was obtained or the sources used to verify the claims. Providing more context about the sources and the process of gathering information would enhance the transparency of the reporting. Additionally, explaining any potential conflicts of interest or biases in the reporting would improve the reader's understanding of the story's impartiality.