August 21, 2025 – Springfield, Massachusetts – The Hampden District Attorney’s Office has entered a nolle prosequi in the case of Commonwealth v. Edward Wright, effectively ending the prosecution of the 1984 murder of Penny Anderson, after a Superior Court judge granted Wright a new trial four decades after his conviction.

Edward Wright was convicted in 1985 for the killing of 24-year-old Penny Anderson. His conviction was upheld five separate times over the ensuing decades by judges of both the Massachusetts Trial Court and the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC).

“The defendant received a fair trial in 1985, and multiple courts – including the Supreme Judicial Court – confirmed that fact on five separate occasions,” said Hampden District Attorney Anthony D. Gulluni. “Despite this, a sixth motion for a new trial was granted earlier this year by a Superior Court judge who, notwithstanding his ultimate decision, acknowledged that the incriminating evidence remained strong.”

The Court’s recent ruling, outlined in a lengthy written decision, was based on procedural concerns dating back to the original trial. However, in that same decision, the judge stated that “the incriminating evidence against the defendant was quite strong,” and that Wright had simply met a “relatively low burden” to justify a retrial. The Supreme Judicial Court described the compelling evidence – including a statement to a police officer in Delaware where the defendant fled after the killing, and a confession to a friend – as “so incriminating that the defendant denied making the statements at trial” when the High Court affirmed the denial of his fifth motion for new trial.

But, due to the significant passage of time and the loss of key witnesses, the Commonwealth has determined that retrying the case would no longer be possible. The Commonwealth initially believed that it could proceed with a retrial in the case, but after extensive investigation and interviews with surviving witnesses, a retrial is not feasible.

“Our decision to dismiss the case does not mean that this was a wrongful conviction or that we believe the defendant is innocent,” said Gulluni. “It is a legal and ethical decision based solely on the reality that, 40 years later, we cannot reconstruct the trial that occurred in 1985.”

District Attorney Gulluni also expressed concern over the broader implications of the case.

“We are deeply troubled and frustrated by a process that allows a murder conviction that was upheld multiple times by the Commonwealth’s highest court to be undone four decades later. It raises important questions about the finality of verdicts and the consistency of our justice system,” Gulluni said.

The District Attorney’s Office continues to stand by the integrity of the outcome reached by the jury. “As some may celebrate this outcome, our thoughts remain with the victim and her loved ones, whose suffering continues, now worsened by this unforeseen reversal. While the crime may be distant to some, it is ever-present to those who love Penny,” Gulluni said. “While we must make decisions consistent with our ethical responsibilities, our hearts are with Penny and her family and our minds are struck by the increasing fragility of justice in our system.”