Pamela Smart, serving life, seeks a new trial as a New Hampshire judge weighs her latest petition

CONCORD, N.H. [KSAT 12]

A New Hampshire judge heard arguments Monday in a bid to overturn the conviction of Pamela Smart, who has spent more than three decades behind bars for her role in her husband's 1990 murder. The judge said he would issue a ruling within 30 to 60 days on whether Smart's latest legal challenge can proceed.

Smart, 58, was a 22-year-old school media coordinator when she became involved in an affair with a 15-year-old student. That boy subsequently shot and killed her husband, Gregory Smart, in Derry, New Hampshire. Though Smart maintained she had no knowledge of the murder plot, she was convicted of accomplice to first-degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. The person who fired the fatal shots was released from prison in 2015 after serving 25 years. The original trial captured national attention as one of the first cases to be broadcast entirely on live television.

Smart filed her habeas corpus petition in January, claiming her original conviction was secured through multiple constitutional breaches. Attending the hearing remotely from Bedford Hills Correctional Facility for Women in New York, Smart's legal team presented several arguments for why the verdict should be vacated.

The defense contends that courtroom transcripts used during trial contained inaccurate recordings of Smart's taped conversations with others. Prosecutors provided jurors with written transcripts that included words that were not actually audible in the audio recordings themselves. Examples cited by the defense included the word "killed" appearing in the transcript for the phrase "you had your husband killed," the term "busted" in "I'm gonna be busted," and the word "murder" in "this would have been the perfect murder." According to Smart's attorney Matthew Zernhelt, this practice compromised the jury's ability to independently evaluate the evidence. "When people are handed a script, they inevitably hear the words they are shown," Zernhelt said, arguing that jurors were essentially steered toward a predetermined verdict.

Smart's lawyers additionally challenged the trial judge's instructions to the jury, claiming they improperly emphasized premeditation without directing jurors to consider only the evidence actually presented in court. They also argued that the mandatory life sentence imposed was improper under New Hampshire law, which did not require such a sentence for accomplice to first-degree murder charges.

State attorneys asked the judge to reject the petition, arguing that most of Smart's claims had already been raised and rejected during previous appeals. The judge took the matter under advisement Monday without immediately ruling on the state's motion to dismiss.