Thursday, March 24, 2016

Pamela Smart should have taken the deal

"Who wouldn’t support a woman who still wears the Scarlet Letter and is hated by an unforgiving public that has been fed poison and lies by the media for 25 years? - Dr. Eleanor Pam

On May 1, 1990, Pamela Smart came home from a work meeting to find her condominium ransacked and her husband murdered. Police officials say the crime scene looked like a disrupted burglary. Smart was later accused of seducing 15-year-old Billy Flynn and threatening to stop having sex with him unless he killed her husband. Flynn did so with the help of friends Patrick "Pete" Randall, Vance "J.R." Lattime, Jr., and Raymond Fowler. Flynn shot Greggory Smart as Randall held him down, while Lattimer, the driver, waited in the getaway car outside with Fowler.


Pamela Smart's trial in Rockingham County Superior Court in Exeter, NH was widely watched and garnered considerable media attention. The prosecution's case relied heavily on testimony from Smart's teenaged co-conspirators, who had secured their own plea bargains before her trial began. Billy Flynn, Patrick Randall, Vance Lattime Jr. and Raymond Fowler would be household names following the sensational trial. Smart chose to refuse a pretrial plea bargain, hoping that her high priced attorney, Albert Johnson of Boston could garner an acquittal and spare her from potential capital punishment. Johnson had worked on the Watergate case defending James McCord. He also represented Patty Hearst and well known attorney, F. Lee Bailey.

The trial started on March 4, 1991 with Assistant Attorney General Diane Nicolosi portraying the teenagers as naive victims of an "evil woman bent on murder." The prosecutor, Paul Maggiotto portrayed Pamela Smart as the cold-blooded mastermind who controlled her young lover. Nicolosi claimed that Smart seduced Flynn to get him to murder her husband, so that she could avoid an expensive divorce and benefit from a $140,000 life insurance policy. In her testimony, Smart acknowledged that she had an affair with the teenager, but claimed that the murder of her husband was solely the doing of Flynn and his friends as a reaction to her telling Flynn that she wished to end their relationship and repair her marriage. She insisted that she neither participated in the murder plot nor had any foreknowledge of it.


After a 14-day trial, Smart was found guilty on March 22, 1991 of "being an accomplice to first-degree murder, conspiracy to commit murder, and witness tampering." This was largely as a result of the testimony of her co-conspirators and secretly taped conversations with Cecilia Pierce who wore a wire to record the discussion. Smart appeared to contradict her claims of having wanted to reconcile with her husband and of having no knowledge of the boys' plot. She could have been charged with capital murder, but the prosecution decided against it. Pam was given a mandatory sentence of life in prison without the possibility for parole.

The last inmate to be put to death in New Hampshire was in 1939. Howard Long, a storekeeper from Alton, was hanged at the New Hampshire State Prison in Concord on July 14, for molesting and fatally beating a 10-year-old Laconia boy named Mark Neville Jensen.

I had the privilege of speaking with Paul Maggiotto, the former prosecutor, and now defense attorney. Paul had moved to New Hampshire in 1990 from Brooklyn, NY where he had been an Assistant District Attorney. He was heavily involved in many high profile cases involving murder and rape. The fact that he had handled cases under the bright lights in a large city made him an easy selection for the Pamela Smart trial.

It’s the plot that launched 1,000 satellite feeds, a theme of the soap operas interrupted by live broadcasts of Pamela Smart’s murder trial for three weeks in March 1991. Judges and lawyers have seen enough criminal cases to know how the crazy equations of human dynamics can add up to murder. "It was another murder case. It was strange, but I’ve seen stranger," said Judge Douglas Gray.

The extensive television coverage was nothing new to Paul Maggiotto. It was the first time that a court case was filmed live. Channel 9 carried the proceedings, interrupting regular daily programming with live film of what was happening in the courtroom, and then rebroadcasting the day’s highlights at midnight. Former Rockingham County Sheriff Wayne Vetter estimated there were about 150 reporters from all over the world milling about the courthouse. With 20 cameras in the courtroom, and Pamela Smart just a few feet away, it was "business as usual" for the relatively new Granite State prosecutor.

I was the one and only telephone call to Paul Maggiotto's law practice wanting to discuss the Pamela Smart verdict on the 25th anniversary of the event. Paul was more than gracious with his time reliving the whole process. "The day is no different than any other", said Paul.

The television coverage was nonstop. The media descended on southern New Hampshire in a way that had never been seen before. "It was absolutely bizarre." Knowing how to "avoid the noise' and preparation were the key ingredients in the case. According to Paul, the case was strong. A prosecutor needs to do a few basic things, and they will win. 1. Know the rules 2. Follow the rules 3. Don't do something stupid.

" The prosecutor stands on third base while the defendant is still in the batters box. Follow the game plan, stay focused, and one can walk to home plate before the defendant can even get the bat off their shoulder. "

There was never a fear of Pamela Smart. The media coverage was the same for both sides. While the verdict is always in doubt, "I didn't lose any sleep prior to the decision." The move from prosecutor to defense attorney in 1993 was going to happen, regardless of the outcome of the trial. I don't replay the trial because there is no need to. It did help me build my private practice because clients knew who I was.

Smart argues that the media had influenced her trial and conviction. Pamela has been trying get a new trial, but so far has been rebuffed at each step. The latest was an attempt "to pursue an appeal from the denial of her federal habeas petition." This appears to be a mechanism used when one's constitutional rights have been violated and a lower court has refused an appeal. A three judge panel ruled against her, saying some claims were forfeited by not bringing them up before, and that others did not merit an appeal.

I mentioned to Paul Maggiotto that Pamela Smart is still trying to get a new trial. She blames the poor performance of her attorney Albert Johnson in representing her. Maggiotto laughed when I asked if he wanted to be part of the sequel. " That ship has sailed."

"I still have my notes if anybody wants them."


Paul Murphy

Follow me on Twitter at @_prmurphy

No comments:

Post a Comment