Salman Rushdie Attacker Convicted of Terror Offences

A man already serving 25 years in prison for attempting to kill Sir Salman Rushdie has been convicted of further charges, including providing material support to a terrorist organisation, the BBC reported.

Hadi Matar was found guilty in a New York federal court of assisting Hezbollah, the Lebanese armed faction designated as a terrorist group by the United States, the United Kingdom and many other countries. The jury also convicted him of engaging in an act of transnational terrorism.

The case prosecutors made

Prosecutors argued that Matar had been motivated by the fatwa issued against Sir Salman in 1989 by Iran's religious leader, and specifically by a 2006 speech from the then-leader of Hezbollah calling for that edict to be carried out.

They told the court in Buffalo that Matar, 28, had planned the attack over two years. "The defendant decided no one was going to do it, so he had to do it," assistant US attorney Timothy Lynch said in his closing statement, according to The Buffalo News.

The jury was shown videos made by Matar as part of the evidence.

The author's testimony

Sir Salman testified during the trial, describing being stabbed 15 times — including wounds to his cheek, chest, eye, neck and thigh.

"I was on the stage, lying down, with an enormous pool of blood all around me," he told the court, calling it "an enormous and expansive lake of blood."

The author lifted the darkened lens of his glasses to show the jury the injury to his eye, which has left him partially blinded, and said the knife had come "within millimetres from my brain." He credited a firefighter with saving his life by providing medical care at the scene.

The defence argument

Defence attorneys disputed that the attack was motivated by terrorism. They questioned Sir Salman on the stand about whether he should have anticipated a backlash to his 1988 novel The Satanic Verses — a line of argument the jury ultimately rejected.

Why the second trial mattered

Matar was already convicted of attempted murder and assault in a state trial, and is serving 25 years for that. The federal case addressed a separate question: not whether he carried out the attack, but whether it constituted terrorism and whether he acted in support of a designated organisation.

That distinction carries weight beyond this defendant. A conviction on material support grounds treats the attack as part of an organised campaign rather than an isolated act, which affects both sentencing and how similar cases are charged in future.

Reporting basis: BBC World.