The man charged with stabbing author Salman Rushdie rejected a plea deal Tuesday that would have shortened his state prison term but exposed him to a federal terrorism-related charge, the suspect’s lawyer said.
Hadi Matar, 26, has been held without bail since the 2022 attack, in which he is accused of stabbing Rushdie more than a dozen times and blinding him in one eye as the acclaimed writer was onstage, about to give a lecture at the Chautauqua Institution in western New York.
Matar’s attorney, Nathaniel Barone, confirmed that Matar, who lived in Fairview, New Jersey, rejected the agreement Tuesday in Mayville, New York.
The agreement would have had Matar plead guilty in Chautauqua County to attempted murder in exchange for a maximum state prison sentence of 20 years, down from 25 years. It would have also required him to plead guilty to a federal charge of attempting to provide material support to a designated terrorist organization, which could result in an additional 20 years, attorneys said.
Rushdie, who detailed the attack and his recovery in a memoir, had spent years in hiding after the Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa, or edict, in 1989 calling for his death over Rushdie’s novel “The Satanic Verses,” which some Muslims consider blasphemous. The author reemerged into the public the late 1990s and has traveled freely over the past two decades.
Matar was born in the U.S. but holds dual citizenship in Lebanon, where his parents were born. His mother has said that her son had become withdrawn and moody after visiting his father in Lebanon in 2018.
Rushdie wrote in his memoir that he saw a man running toward him in the amphitheater, where he was about to speak about the importance of keeping writers safe from harm. The author is on the witness list for Matar’s upcoming trial.
Representatives for Rushdie did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment.
A man accused of stabbing renowned author Salman Rushdie has refused a plea deal that includes a terrorism charge, sparking controversy and speculation about his motives. The accused, whose identity has not been disclosed, allegedly attacked Rushdie in a public setting, causing serious injuries to the author.
The incident has shocked the literary world and raised concerns about the safety of public figures. Rushdie, known for his controversial novel “The Satanic Verses,” has been the target of threats and attacks in the past due to the perceived blasphemy in his work.
The accused man’s refusal to accept the plea deal, which includes a terrorism charge, has left many puzzled. Some speculate that he may be trying to avoid a harsher sentence by not admitting to a terrorist motive. Others believe that he may have political or ideological motivations for the attack.
Authorities are continuing to investigate the incident and gather evidence to build a case against the accused. The refusal of the plea deal has added a layer of complexity to the legal proceedings, as prosecutors will now have to prove the terrorism charge in court.
The case has reignited debates about freedom of speech and the protection of artists and writers who express controversial ideas. Rushdie’s supporters have expressed solidarity with him and called for justice to be served in this case.
As the legal process unfolds, the accused man’s motives and intentions remain unclear. The outcome of the trial will have far-reaching implications for the protection of public figures and the consequences of violent acts against them.
In the meantime, Rushdie continues to recover from his injuries and has expressed gratitude for the outpouring of support from his fans and colleagues in the literary community. The incident serves as a stark reminder of the dangers faced by those who dare to challenge societal norms and push boundaries through their creative work.
