The Pamela Smart case has gripped the nation since it first began in 1990. Smart, then 22, was convicted of conspiring with her 15-year-old lover to murder her husband. She was given a life sentence without the possibility of parole, while her lover and three other teens involved in the crime served shorter sentences and have since been released. Now, 30 years later, Smart is appealing to New Hampshire’s highest court to force the state’s Executive Council to reconsider her request for a chance at freedom.
Smart’s attorney, Mark Sisti, argued that the five-member council did not spend any time poring over Smart’s petition—which included many letters of support from inmates, supervisors, and others—or even discuss it before rejecting her sentence reduction request in less than three minutes in March. Sisti asked the court to order the panel to reconsider the request, arguing that Smart had not been given “even the minimal due process hearing that we even get at the Department of Motor Vehicles.”
The attorney general’s office opposed Smart’s commutation requests, saying she has never accepted full responsibility for the crimes. Laura Lombardi, senior assistant attorney general, argued that Smart “has no protectable constitutional interest in receiving commutation of her sentence.”
Smart’s petition included details of her life in prison, where she has earned two master’s degrees, tutored fellow inmates, been ordained as a minister, and is part of an inmate liaison committee. She also apologized to her husband’s family and said she is remorseful and rehabilitated.
The court is currently weighing Smart’s petition and considering whether to order the Council to reconsider her request. With the nation’s attention once more on Pamela Smart, it remains to be seen whether she will get the chance for a new life that she is asking for.
