SerpApi.Org
Pamela Smart, 58-years-old, is currently serving a life sentence without parole for planning the murder of her husband in 1990, filed a new petition on July 20, 2026, seeking a new trial. The Merrimack County Superior Court Judge James Kennedy heard Smart’s plea, and took the matter into consideration and was expected to deliver a judgment in 30 to 60 days.
The Murder
Pamela Smart was convicted of the murder of her husband in 1990; she was 22 years old at the time and working as a high-school media coordinator. She developed an affair with a 15-year-old boy, who later shot her husband, Gregory Smart, in Derry, New Hampshire. The teenager, William Flynn, also known as Billy, testified in court, mentioning that Smart wanted her husband dead because she was scared to lose her home in an expensive divorce. Smart also allegedly planned on claiming the $140,000 life insurance of her husband.
Flynn allegedly recruited three other teenagers to execute Smart’s husband. On May 1, 1990, Flynn, along with Patrick Randall, snuck into Smart’s Derry home. Smart allegedly left the door unlocked for the teens, as she went to attend a school board meeting. The two teenagers, after entering the house, forced the victim to his knees, and while Randall held a knife to his throat, Flynn shot him in the head. Smart returned later at night and reported the incident as an instance of burglary.
After the incident, one of the students who was cooperating with the police wore a wire and recorded a conversation with Smart, where she was pressuring the student to remain silent about the crime. The audio tape later became the most crucial evidence resulting in her conviction.
Court Proceedings
However, now Smart’s lawyers have claimed that the transcript of the recording, which was provided to the jury at the time of the trial were incorrect. They also said that there were words infused into the transcript that were not audible in the recording. For instance, the word “killed” in the sentence “you had your husband killed” was not audible; also, the word “busted” in the sentence “I’m gonna be busted” and the word “murder in the sentence “this would have been a perfect murder” were not audible.
Smart’s attorney Matthew Zernhelt said, “Modern science confirms what common sense has always told us: when people are handed a script, they inevitably hear the words they are shown. Jurors were not evaluating the recording independently; they were being directed towards a conclusion, and that direction decided the verdict.”
A forensic study was presented in court during the petition filing by Zernhelt, which showed that providing transcripts along with muffled audio leads the listeners to believe the written text even when it is inaccurate.
Assistant Attorney General John Drennan said that facts supported none of the claims made by Smart and that she was “using the habeas corpus process as a substitute for an appeal.”
“Maybe cognitive bias has set in, but that doesn’t mean I can’t, when listening, say, Hey, I am not sure it’s right,” Drennan said.
Smart has previously tried to appeal for a sentence reduction several times, but all of the petitions in the past have been rejected.
