Roger Clemens’ prosecutors are disappointed

The desire of the federal government connected with the case of Roger Clemens was following: they desired to prove that this athlete had lied before the Congress about intake of anabolic steroids and HGH. But the government couldn’t achieve this goal. It was expected that Andy Pettitte would say that Roger Clemens had acknowledged that he had taken the prohibited medicines during a conversation in 1999 or in 2000. But the affirmation of Andy Pettitee was shocking for prosecutors. This man said that he couldn’t confirm that Roger Clemens had used steroids and HGH because he was not sure.
In fact, were the prosecutors of Roger Clemens disappointed by the testimony of Andy Pettitte? This person swore for the 2008 Congressional hearings on application of steroids in the Major League Baseball that Roger Clemens admitted to administration of HGH. But he provided opposite affirmations at the Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse in Washington.
Michael Attanasio, a defense attorney for Roger Clemens, asked Andy Pettitte whether he can say that he is 50-50 that he has misunderstood Roger Clemens about HGH. Pettitte answered that he is indeed 50-50 about this aspect.
When the prosecutors heard Pettitte’s answer, they became confused. They affirmed that Andy Pettitte never said this way, when he was asked several times.
The U. S. District Court Judge Reggie Walton noticed that he understood that Andy Pettitte’s answer has been conflicted. In fact, his statement was following: “I don’t know”.
The attorneys for Roger Clemens utilized the moment of the federal prosecutors’ embarrassment. They requested the judge to brush aside the testimony of Andy Pettitte because he was 50-50. The attorneys claimed that he probably misunderstood the athlete Roger Clemens or he forgot the details of the conversation.  
The government has stated that the jury still allows taking into account the testimony of Andy Pettitte. ASUSA Dunham has claimed that under federal rules jury is allowed to choose which testimony to believe. He hopes that the jury will brush aside the testimony which doesn’t support the government.
Thus, the testimony presented by Andy Pettitte and his wife led to problems. Testimonies of Andy’s wife during the first trial led to the declaration of a mistrial by the judge Walton.
Pettitte affirms that he is Roger Clemens’ friend. Clemens must also confirm that they are friends after Andy  Pettitte’s last testimony.