Photo by Gregory Bacon
Hadi Matar, center, is pictured with members of his defense team.
MAYVILLE – The fate of a New Jersey man who is accused of stabbing a world-renowned author multiple times in an attempt to kill him two and a half years ago is now in the hands of the jury.
Friday morning both the defense and prosecution gave their closing remarks in the trial of 27-year-old Hadi Matar, who has been charged with second-degree attempted murder and second-degree assault.
The attempted murder charge is from the stabbing attack on award-winning author Salman Rushdie on Aug. 12, 2022 during a presentation at Chautauqua Institution. The second-degree assault charge is for injuries sustained by Henry Reece, who was to be a co-presenter with Rushdie.
Assistant Public Defender Andrew Brautigam spoke for the defense for the closing remarks. He argued that the prosecution failed to show any sense of intent of Matar to kill Rushdie. Instead, Brautigam alleged, this was simply an assault.
“It was upsetting viewing in some ways but they did not give you anything that you would need to determine Mr. Matar’s state of mind,” Brautigam said. “As you deliberate and as you talk in the jury room, there is simply no exhibit that you can point to, nothing you can review to what Mr. Matar intended that day.”
For the second-degree assault charge, Brautigam argued that the prosecution failed to show that it was his client who injured Reece. “We didn’t see a single bit of evidence as to how those injuries occurred,” he said.
After 20 minutes, District Attorney Jason Schmidt gave the closing arguments for the prosecution.
Judge David Foley had ordered that closing arguments take no more than an hour and Schmidt used every bit of time in his closing.
Schmidt said just because we can’t read Matar’s mind, doesn’t mean that we don’t know what his intent was.
He began recounting testimony of witnesses who described how Rushdie nearly died in the attack.
Schmidt reminded the jurors of how Rushdie removed his glasses, showing his eye that no longer functions as a result of the attack.
Schmidt played back a portion of two of the videos and played them at slower speeds to clearly show the attack.
Schmidt invited the jurors to note the location of the stab wounds in Rushdie’s face, neck and chest.
He noted how the attack occurred not in a bar or a subway, but during a presentation for the public. “There were a lot of people that day, but there was only one person who was targeted,” Schmidt said.
Schmidt paused the video in portions showing how Matar came up behind Rushdie, began stabbing him, and as Rushdie tried to get away Matar continued to stab him.
With the attack of Reece, Schmidt showed a photograph of him with his injuries, noting that these injuries were serious and significant.
At one point, Schmidt paused the video and said he believes that Reece was being injured while attempting to protect Rushdie. There was no clear video shown of Reece being stabbed, compared to the video that showed Rushdie being attacked.
Following closing arguments Foley instructed the jury about weighing the evidence and discussed what reasonable doubt is. He also noted how motive is not required in the crimes charged, however a lack of motive may be considered.