Lee Jones

Mr. Jones’ new  attorneys have raised a host of issues regarding the prosecutor, Kristen Keller: her frequent references to Mr. Jones being a homosexual (though he says he’s not);  calling his trial attorneys the “Charleston lawyers,â€? referring to them as a legal “dream teamâ€? and suggesting they intentionally frightened witnesses on the stand to confuse them; and the use of testimony she knew wasn’t true.

Ms. Keller denies their allegations and the state, in general, defends her. For example, in recently filed court documents, the state said that because Mr. Jones was convicted of molesting boys, he was therefore “by definition� gay and that Ms. Keller’s remarks didn’t hurt Mr. Jones’ right to a fair trial.

However, it’s not the first time Ms. Keller has been accused of misconduct during a trial. West Virginia’s Supreme Court has reversed only a handful of cases because of prosecutorial misconduct—twice because of Ms. Keller.

“I’ve raised plenty of prosecutorial misconduct claims in my career,� Mr. Jones attorney, Robert Rosenthal told Where Doubt Remains. “You don’t win a lot of them. Courts often say yes, the prosecutor was over the top, but it was harmless error ... imagine how far you have to go to say not only that what she did was improper but the error was not harmless ... that's pretty far to go. And for that to happen repeatedly, shows, I always think that shows desperation.�

Ms. Keller is quick to point out, however, that though some of her cases have been reversed, each time the defendants were retried and convicted again. And while that may be true, in at least one of the retrials, the Supreme Court noted that she, again, made inappropriate comments during her closing argument.

But so far, no West Virginia courts have agreed with Mr. Jones when it comes to his claims of prosecutorial misconduct or any of the other issues he’s raised on appeal. Not even the new evidence – the recantations of Michael Roop and Michael McCallister – have swayed them.

Mr. Jones’ most recent appeal was rejected by a circuit court in West Virginia in November. That decision will be appealed to the state’s Supreme Court and barring a win there, Mr. Jones’ attorneys will move back to federal court.

At least there, Mrs. Jones told Where Doubt Remains, they’ve been given a sign of hope to cling to. In his decision allowing Mr. Jones attorneys to start the appeals process over in state court (the case was returned to state court in 2005 because of a legal technicality relating to Mr. McCallister's recantation), a federal magistrate said “the Court finds that Michael McCallister’s statement, in conjunction with the evidence of record, lends support to (Mr. Jones’) challenge to the sufficiency of evidence and his claims of prosecutorial misconduct.â€?

For now, Mrs. Jones said, they’re just hoping the magistrate isn’t retired by the time their appeals reach him again.