South Port, N.C. — A defense attorney for a man accused of a deadly shooting spree last year has requested additional time to assess his client’s mental competency. The request comes amid serious charges that include three counts of first-degree murder and multiple counts of attempted murder and assault.
Nigel Edge, who is linked to a tragic incident on Sept. 27, 2025, allegedly opened fire on patrons at the American Fish Company, leading to three fatalities and several injuries. After the shooting, he fled the scene aboard a boat, eventually being apprehended by the Coast Guard after witnesses spotted him matching the shooter’s description.
During a recent court appearance in Brunswick County, Edge appeared to be in physical distress, walking with a limp and wearing a leg brace. His defense team filed a motion to delay proceedings, citing a need for further evaluation before making any decisions regarding a potential death penalty case.
District Attorney Jon David expressed surprise at the motion for a continuance but did not contest it, acknowledging there had been sufficient advance notice. He also mentioned that Edge has undergone competency evaluations previously, with at least one professional concluding that he is unlikely to regain mental competency.
Edge, a veteran of the Iraq War, is reported to struggle with significant mental health challenges. Under North Carolina law, individuals deemed mentally incompetent cannot be sentenced to death, which adds urgency to the defense’s request for further assessment.
The presiding judge granted the request for a continuance, ordering a new evaluation to be conducted through state resources. Edge is expected to return to court on April 7, when further proceedings will determine the next steps in this high-profile case.
This ongoing saga has drawn attention not only because of the gruesome nature of the crimes but also due to the complexities surrounding mental health issues in the judicial process. As the legal landscape develops, both the prosecution and defense are bracing for what could be an intense battle over the interpretation of competency and its implications for the case against Edge.