Inside the Conviction of Iran's Would-Be Assassins
Iranian dissident Masih Alinejad gestures to supporters outside the federal courthouse after testifying at the trial of her would-be assassins in New York, Mar. 18, 2025. Credit - Seth Wenig—AP
On Thursday, after deliberating for less than four hours, a federal jury returned guilty verdicts against two Eastern European self-described gangsters hired by Iran to send a hit man to kill an Iranian dissident at her Brooklyn home. The intended victim, Masih Alinejad, is a journalist and activist with nearly 9 million Instagram followers and the personal enmity of Iran's Supreme Leader, who calls her 'the American agent.'
The July 2022 plot was at least the third attempt on Alinejad's life by Iran, and the trial marked the first time the regime's assassination apparatus was laid out in detail in a U.S. courtroom. Until the United States v. Rafat Amirov and Polad Omarov, the Justice Department had issued indictments against Iranian officials that described their alleged efforts to assassinate U.S. officials—including Donald Trump and John Bolton, Trump's National Security Advisor in his first term. But on the 24th floor of a lower Manhattan U.S. District courthouse, a string of FBI agents filled in the nitty gritty—detailing the forensic penetration of iPhones, Google accounts, WhatsApp messages, and search histories of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) operatives hunting Alinejad.
Through a Google account opened in the name 'Alex Peterson,' evidence showed, Brig. Gen. Ruhollah Bazghandi repeatedly searched 'Masih Alinejad arrests' and 'Masih Alinejad kidnapping plot.' (Iran had plotted to abduct Alinejad in 2020, the U.S. charged in an earlier indictment.) The general also searched his own name and, 93 times in a span of 18 months, looked up 'US sanctions on IRGC intelligence officers,' of which he is the subject.
Other Iranian intelligence operatives repeatedly searched 'Rafat the thief'—the nickname of Amirov, who resided in Iran at the time and according to prosecutors, was the mob's point of contact for Iranian intelligence. (Amirov photos, ID cards, and airline tickets were found on an Iranian operative's phone.) It was unclear how much of the $500,000 Iran had promised for killing Alinejad had been transferred to the mobsters. But after their hitman was arrested near her house on July 28, 2022, with an assault rifle and a ski mask, the Iranians wanted it back.
'This is addressed to you, your boss and mafia,' read a text message to the operative handling Amirov's gang, dated Oct. 4, a Tuesday. 'If the job gets no result by Saturday, there will be nothing left to say between us, and you will lose the job. Additionally, you must return the deposit or else you will have to face the consequences. Until Saturday then.'
All the telltale data was harvested from phones confiscated when the mobsters were arrested or handed over by U.S.-based internet companies that responded to FBI search warrants. (In the digital realm, American law enforcement enjoys home-field advantage.) In the courtroom, the cumulative effect proved overwhelming. In closing arguments, Amirov's lawyer acknowledged that the government's digital narrative 'points in my client's general direction,' and could only argue that no evidence proved it was Amirov's thumbs that sent the more damaging texts. He also pointed to what he described as gaps in the prosecutor's technical case.
But just as the gangsters put their faith in the would-be hitman to carry out the plot, their lawyers turned to him for a defense.
Khalid Mehdiyev, 27, testified for the government. 'I was there to try to kill the journalist,' he announced on the stand, then spent hours cheerfully acknowledging the criminal implications of the messages and images on his phone, including a distinctive screenshot of Alinejad's address that also was on the phone of an Iranian operative.
But Mehdiyev, a hulking presence referred to as 'the fat one' in his bosses' messages, also proved useful to defense lawyers. They pointed out that he had incentive to accommodate the FBI, which had relocated his family to the U.S. from his native Azerbaijan and offered what Omarov's attorney called 'the golden ticket' of remaining in the U.S. after serving a reduced sentence. That attorney, Elena Fast, devoted her entire closing argument to the former pizza delivery driver, who claimed to have testified truthfully about the plot but acknowledged lying about everything from the facts of his visa application to whether his mother was alive (she is, and testified that she'd been threatened by Omarov; Fast told jurors she should have won an Oscar).
Fast argued that Omarov and Mehdiyev, after divvying up a $30,000 advance from Iran, never intended to kill Ahlinejad. 'This was a scam,' she said. 'They wanted to make some money here—scamming the Iranians, scamming Amirov.
Alinejad testified to a packed courtroom on Wednesday. Since moving to the U.S. in 2009, the journalist has emerged as a prominent dissident, with a large following inside Iran, especially among young women who understand the regime's enforcement of compulsory hijab, or modest dress, as shorthand for all its misogynist laws. Iran's most recent attempt on her was in 2024, when, according to a U.S. indictment, Iran engaged an Afghan to arrange the assassination of both her and Trump.
'They wanted Ms. Alinejad dead, not in the witness box,' said Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael D. Lockard.
Appearing with her signature yellow blossom in a towering nimbus of hair, Alinejad explained that she had been out of town for most of the time that Mehdiyev was staking out her street. On the day they overlapped, she was alarmed to lock eyes with him while looking out a front window. 'He was in my sunflowers, staring into my eyes. I got really panicked,' she said, and she ducked out of the house with a friend. Mehdiyev soon fled as well and was arrested after running a stop sign.
Most of Alinejad's testimony was about Iran's animus toward her. 'I've been accused of being CIA, Mossad, MI6,' she said, naming intelligence agencies of Israel and the U.K. In the courtroom, the most chilling statement of Tehran's intentions was a cartoon on the front page of a state-owned newspaper the day after Iranians turned out for a 'women in white' protest Alinejad had organized on social media. The newspaper, controlled by Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, depicted Alinejad cowering in fear beneath the captive forms of two dissidents the regime had lured back to Iran from exile and executed. The caption reads, in Persian: 'Next. Be Ready.'
Alinejad struggled for composure speaking of the executed activists. 'Both of them were kidnapped by the Iranian regime,' she said.
In digital messages entered into evidence, the mobsters referred to their target as 'the whore.' Their attorneys, however, showed Alinejad only respect, and they joined prosecutors in a statement stipulating as unchallenged fact that Iran operated assassination campaigns. 'Her testimony, as courageous as it was, illustrated the contrast between Iran's system and ours,' Michael Martin, who represented Amirov, told the jury in closing. 'Presumption of innocence is one way in which we distinguish ourselves from Iran.'
Contact us at letters@time.com.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Oil inches up, outcome of US-China trade talks awaited
By Anjana Anil (Reuters) -Oil prices edged up on Tuesday as market participants waited for the outcome of U.S.-China talks that could pave the way for easing trade tensions and improve fuel demand. Brent crude futures edged up 12 cents to $67.16 a barrel at 0041 GMT. U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude was trading up 13 cents at $65.42, after hitting its highest since April 4 earlier in the session. On Monday, Brent had risen to $67.19, the highest since April 28, buoyed by the prospect of a U.S.-China trade deal. U.S.-China trade talks were set to continue for a second day in London as top officials aimed to ease tensions that have expanded from tariffs to rare earth curbs, risking global supply chain disruptions and slower growth. U.S. President Donald Trump said on Monday that the talks were going well and he was "only getting good reports" from his team in London. A trade deal between the U.S. and China could support the global economic outlook and boost demand for commodities including oil. Elsewhere, Iran said it would soon hand a counter-proposal for a nuclear deal to the U.S. in response to a U.S. offer that Tehran deems "unacceptable", while Trump made clear that the two sides remained at odds over whether the country would be allowed to continue enriching uranium on Iranian soil. Iran is the third-largest producer among members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and any easing of U.S. sanctions on Iran would allow it to export more oil, weighing on global crude prices. Meanwhile, a Reuters survey found that OPEC oil output rose in May, although the increase was limited as Iraq pumped below target to compensate for earlier overproduction and Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates made smaller hikes than allowed. OPEC+, which pumps about half of the world's oil and includes OPEC members and allies such as Russia, is accelerating its plan to unwind its most recent layer of output cuts. "The prospect of further hikes in OPEC supply continues to hang over the market," Daniel Hynes, senior commodity strategist at ANZ, said in a note. "A permanent shift to a market driven strategy (in OPEC) would push the oil market into a sizeable surplus in H2 2025 and almost surely lead to lower oil prices." Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump vows to "HIT" any protester who spits on police. He pardoned those who did far worse on Jan. 6
In one of his first acts of his second term as president, Donald Trumppardoned hundreds of people who attacked the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, to try to keep him in office, including those who beat police officers. On Monday, Trump posted a warning on social media to those demonstrating in Los Angeles against his immigration crackdown and confronting police and members of the National Guard he had deployed: 'IF THEY SPIT, WE WILL HIT, and I promise you they will be hit harder than they have ever been hit before. Such disrespect will not be tolerated!' The discrepancy of Trump's response to the two disturbances — pardoning rioters who beat police on Jan. 6, which he called 'a beautiful day,' while condemning violence against law enforcement in Los Angeles — illustrates how the president expects his enemies to be held to different standards than his supporters. 'Trump's behavior makes clear that he only values the rule of law and the people who enforce it when it's to his political advantage,' said Brendan Nyhan, a political scientist at Dartmouth College. Trump pardoned more than 1,000 people who tried to halt the transfer of power on that day in 2021, when about 140 officers were injured. The former U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, Matthew Graves, called it 'likely the largest single day mass assault of law enforcement ' in American history. Trump's pardon covered people convicted of attacking police with flagpoles, a hockey stick and a crutch. Many of the assaults were captured on surveillance or body camera footage that showed rioters engaging in hand-to-hand combat with police as officers desperately fought to beat back the angry crowd. While some who were pardoned were convicted of nonviolent crimes, Trump pardoned at least 276 defendants who were convicted of assault charges, according to an Associated Press review of court records. Nearly 300 others had their pending charges dismissed as a result of Trump's sweeping act of clemency. Roughly 180 of the defendants were charged with assaulting, resisting or impeding law enforcement or obstructing officers during a civil disorder. 'They were extremely violent, and they have been treated as if their crimes were nothing, and now the president is trying to use the perception of violence by some protesters as an excuse to crack some heads,' said Mike Romano, who was a deputy chief of the section of the U.S. Attorney's office that prosecuted those involved in the Capitol siege. A White House spokesman, Harrison Fields, defended the president's response: 'President Trump was elected to secure the border, equip federal officials with the tools to execute this plan, and restore law and order.' Trump has long planned to use civil unrest as an opportunity to invoke broad presidential powers, and he seemed poised to do just that on Monday as he activated a battalion of U.S. Marines to support the presence of the National Guard. He mobilized the Guard on Saturday over the opposition of California's governor, Gavin Newsom, and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, both Democrats. The Guard was last sent to Los Angeles by a president during the Rodney King riots in 1992, when President George H.W. Bush invoked the Insurrection Act. Those riots were significantly more violent and widespread than the current protests in Los Angeles, which were largely confined to a stretch of downtown, a relatively small patch in a city of 469 square miles and nearly 4 million people. The current demonstrations were sparked by a confrontation Saturday in the city of Paramount, southeast of downtown Los Angeles, where federal agents were staging at a Department of Homeland Security office. California officials, who are largely Democrats, argued that Trump is trying to create more chaos to expand his power. Newsom, whom Trump suggested should be arrested, called the president's acts 'authoritarian.' But even Rick Caruso, a prominent Los Angeles Republican and former mayoral candidate, posted on the social media site X that the president should not have called in the National Guard. Protests escalated after the Guard arrived, with demonstrators blockading a downtown freeway. Some some set multiple self-driving cars on fire and pelted Los Angeles police with debris and fireworks. Romano said he worried that Trump's double standard on how demonstrators should treat law enforcement will weaken the position of police in American society. He recalled that, during the Capitol attack, many rioters thought police should let them into the building because they had supported law enforcement's crackdown on anti-police demonstrations after George Floyd was murdered in 2020. That sort of 'transactional' approach Trump advocates is toxic, Romano said. 'We need to expect law enforcement are doing their jobs properly,' he said. Believing they just cater to the president 'is going to undermine public trust in law enforcement.' ___ Associated Press writers Michael Kunzleman and Alanna Durkin Richer in Washington contributed to this report.

Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Editorial: MAGA morphs into Make America Cruel Again
The horrifying weekend scenes in Los Angeles — National Guard on the streets, the governor of California threatening to sue the president of the United States for breaching state sovereignty, vehicles set on fire, attacks on law enforcement officers, ordinary people getting hurt, kids seeing all kinds of horrors from people they have been taught to trust — were deeply disturbing to the point where we wondered how on God's green earth this country can hold it together for three-and-a-half more years of this level of presidential overreach, this amount of hatred and division. But we do know this. We sure don't want to see any kind of repeat of those scenes in Chicago. Everyone had better pick their words carefully. Nobody can argue that Donald Trump, as president of the United States, does not have the authority to deport those who crossed the border without authorization and who have received due process in a court of law. Nobody can argue that he did not disclose his intention to do so during the presidential campaign. Nobody who believes in the rule of law can say that federal agents should be physically prevented from following their orders (withholding cooperation is something entirely different). And nobody can say that the Trump administration is the first to remove such people. But the brute nature of the methodology, the scale of the operation and the horrifying accompanying theatrics should shock every American, even those who consider themselves part of the MAGA movement. They supposedly signed up for American greatness, not abject cruelty. This is the danger of a fundamentally performative president, a leader for whom the political benefits of calling in the National Guard clearly outranks the far greater risks, which is that such a decision destabilizes a city and forces everyone into ever more extreme positions. The scorched earth rhetoric from federal officials has been like something out of dystopian fiction. Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff, posted on social media that 'this is a fight to save civilization.' On the contrary, Mr. Miller. His ultimate boss, Trump, said 'a once great American City, Los Angeles, has been invaded and occupied by Illegal Aliens and Criminals,' which is so much balderdash, mere red-meat language designed for political purposes and not effective immigration policy, which requires disincentives, sure, but also nuance, complexity and a sense of the historical realities. There was a mandate from the American people for securing the border, deporting those who break or have broken the law and for fixing immigration. There was no mandate for brutality. We lay some of the blame for what happened in Los Angeles this weekend on both political parties, given that it is at least in part a consequence of their collective failure to pass any kind of comprehensive immigration reform that would have secured the borders, prevented overwhelming numbers of unauthorized folks entering and offered a fair and compassionate solution for the many people here without legal permission who have lived productive U.S. for years. That's on Democrats, who allowed the border to get out of control during the first part of the Biden administration, as well as Republicans. Many left-wing Democrats came to favor de facto open borders over the past several years, or at least no criminal-style enforcements of immigration violations, and Democrats knew they could not get that past a plurality of Americans in a general election. Rather than confront that internal division and reach a compromise, they punted for years. By the time Trump had total fealty from the Republican Party and could (and did) derail any such effort merely for his own political gain, it was too late. And now, with cruel, scorched-earth zealots in charge, we have the worst of all possible worlds for America's great cities and for many people whose only crime was trying to escape poverty and seeking out a better life. Anyone with even an ounce of common sense could see that Trump's apparent intention of deporting 12 million people in the country without legal permission, concentrated as they are in the core of America's biggest cities, is both unethical and impractical, given the above. The current rhetoric makes no distinction between recent arrivals and those who have lived here productively for years, and it paints otherwise law-abiding folks with the same brush as criminals, which is un-American. Leaders of blue cities and governors of blue states now find themselves caught somewhere between wanting to stop these deportations, over which they know they have no formal legal control, and their Welcoming Cities ordinances that forbid only cooperation with federal authorities. They, too, have political considerations to weigh. But they should not be the prime concern. Caught in the middle are local police departments, whose job is not to aid federal immigration officers but to maintain law and order. On the one hand, they have to deal with the tactics of an increasingly militarized ICE, as aided by the National Guard. They also have to deal with progressive politicians ready to accuse them of cooperation at every juncture. No, cops should not leave when protesters (or rioters, depending on your preferred politics) take to the streets. They have a different job to do, which is to keep our cities safe. So we are serving advance notice, Mr. President, that we don't want to see the National Guard, or the Marines, or any other branch of the U.S. military on the streets of Chicago. We urge you to dial down the rhetoric and the threats and we call on Democratic officials to do the same, which is not to say they should refrain from disagreeing with the manner of these actions. We urge those in your administration to negotiate with local officials, to treat everyone with dignity and respect, and to understand, for the love of God, that our children are watching and listening. Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@