Pamela Smart has requested a New Hampshire judge to allow her petition for a new trial to proceed. Smart, convicted in 1991 for her role in the murder of her husband, Gregory Smart, argues that prosecutors misled jurors by presenting transcripts of recorded conversations that allegedly contained words not audible in the recordings. During a hearing, Judge James Kennedy listened to arguments regarding the petition for habeas corpus relief and is expected to issue a ruling within 30 to 60 days.
Smart's attorney, Matthew Zernhelt, contended that new forensic research indicates that jurors may have been influenced by the written transcripts, which could have affected their interpretation of the recordings. He pointed out that jurors relied on these transcripts to understand the recordings, which ultimately contributed to the conviction.
In response, Assistant Attorney General John Drennan argued against the petition, stating that Smart is attempting to relitigate issues already addressed by appellate courts. Drennan emphasized that the jurors were instructed to rely on the recordings over the transcripts. Smart's legal team also claims that extensive media coverage and flawed jury instructions impacted the trial's outcome. Smart has previously accepted responsibility for her involvement in the murder, which has been a point of contention in her ongoing legal challenges.