BOSTON (AP) — Pamela Smart, who is serving life in prison for orchestrating the murder of her husband by her teenage student in 1990, is seeking to overturn her conviction over what her lawyers claim were several constitutional violations. The petition for habeas corpus relief was filed Monday in New York, where she is being held at the Bedford Hills Correctional Facility for Women, and in New Hampshire, where the murder happened.
“Ms. Smart’s trial unfolded in an environment that no court had previously confronted — wall-to-wall media coverage that blurred the line between allegation and evidence,” Jason Ott, a member of Smart’s legal team, said. “This petition challenges whether a fair adversarial process took place.”
This legal push comes about seven months after New Hampshire Governor Kelly Ayotte rejected a request for a sentence reduction hearing, stating that after reviewing the case, she found it not deserving of a hearing.
In the petition, Smart's lawyers argue that the jury was misled by the prosecution through inaccurate transcripts of surreptitiously recorded conversations, which included words incorrectly attributed to Smart. For instance, they claim the word 'killed' appeared in the transcript but was not audible on the recordings.
“Modern science confirms what common sense has always told us: when people are handed a script, they inevitably hear the words they are shown,” Smart’s attorney, Matthew Zernhelt, stated. He emphasized that the jury was directed towards a conclusion that influenced the verdict.
The petition also contends that media attention and improper jury instructions tainted the verdict. Jurors were advised to find evidence of premeditation without being reminded to consider only information presented at trial.
Smart was a 22-year-old high school media coordinator at the time of the murder, which involved her affair with a 15-year-old boy, who was convicted for the murder of her husband, Gregory Smart. Despite denying prior knowledge of the murder plot, she was convicted of being an accomplice to first-degree murder and sentenced to life without parole.
The case captured national attention and became emblematic of a media frenzy surrounding high-profile criminal cases involving sexual relationships between educators and students, further popularized by Joyce Maynard’s book and a film adaptation. Smart's trial, often referred to as a media circus, involved testimony from the student who shot her husband, detailing the manipulative messages he received from her.
In June 2024, it was reported that Smart began to take responsibility for her husband's death, indicating years of evasion as a coping mechanism. The case has left a significant mark on media and legal landscapes in the U.S.
“Ms. Smart’s trial unfolded in an environment that no court had previously confronted — wall-to-wall media coverage that blurred the line between allegation and evidence,” Jason Ott, a member of Smart’s legal team, said. “This petition challenges whether a fair adversarial process took place.”
This legal push comes about seven months after New Hampshire Governor Kelly Ayotte rejected a request for a sentence reduction hearing, stating that after reviewing the case, she found it not deserving of a hearing.
In the petition, Smart's lawyers argue that the jury was misled by the prosecution through inaccurate transcripts of surreptitiously recorded conversations, which included words incorrectly attributed to Smart. For instance, they claim the word 'killed' appeared in the transcript but was not audible on the recordings.
“Modern science confirms what common sense has always told us: when people are handed a script, they inevitably hear the words they are shown,” Smart’s attorney, Matthew Zernhelt, stated. He emphasized that the jury was directed towards a conclusion that influenced the verdict.
The petition also contends that media attention and improper jury instructions tainted the verdict. Jurors were advised to find evidence of premeditation without being reminded to consider only information presented at trial.
Smart was a 22-year-old high school media coordinator at the time of the murder, which involved her affair with a 15-year-old boy, who was convicted for the murder of her husband, Gregory Smart. Despite denying prior knowledge of the murder plot, she was convicted of being an accomplice to first-degree murder and sentenced to life without parole.
The case captured national attention and became emblematic of a media frenzy surrounding high-profile criminal cases involving sexual relationships between educators and students, further popularized by Joyce Maynard’s book and a film adaptation. Smart's trial, often referred to as a media circus, involved testimony from the student who shot her husband, detailing the manipulative messages he received from her.
In June 2024, it was reported that Smart began to take responsibility for her husband's death, indicating years of evasion as a coping mechanism. The case has left a significant mark on media and legal landscapes in the U.S.
