Federal government couldn’t achieve goal linked with Roger Clemens’ case

The desire of the federal government linked with the case of Roger Clemens was following: they desired to prove that this sportsperson had lied before the Congress about application of anabolic steroids and HGH. But the government couldn’t do it. It was expected that Andy Pettitte would claim that Roger Clemens had acknowledged that he had taken the forbidden preparations during a conversation in 1999 or in 2000. But the affirmation of Andy Pettitee was shocking for prosecutors. This person said that he couldn’t affirm that Roger Clemens had used steroids and HGH because he was not sure.
Actually, did the testimony of Andy Pettittte shock the prosecutors of Roger Clemens? This man swore for the 2008 Congressional hearings on usage of steroids in the Major League Baseball that Roger Clemens admitted to intake of HGH. But he presented opposite testimony at the Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse in Washington.
Michael Attanasio, a defense attorney for Roger Clemens, asked Andy Pettitte whether he may affirm that he is 50-50 that he has misunderstood Roger Clemens about HGH. Andy Pettitte answered that he is actually 50-50 about this aspect.
When Clemens’ prosecutors heard Pettitte’s answer, they didn’t know what to do. They confirmed that Pettitte never answered this way, when he was asked certain times.
The U. S. District Court Judge Reggie Walton noticed that he understood that Andy Pettitte’s answer has been conflicted. Actually, his testimony was following: “I don’t know”.
The attorneys for Roger Clemens utilized the moment of the federal prosecutors’ embarrassment. They asked the judge to ignore the testimony of Andy Pettitte because he was 50-50. According to the attorneys, he probably misunderstood the athlete Roger Clemens or he can’t remember the details of the conversation.  
The government has noted that the jury still allows taking in consideration the testimony of Andy Pettitte. ASUSA Dunham has claimed that under federal laws jury is allowed to choose which testimony to believe. This person hopes that the jury will disregard 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 resulted in the declaration of a mistrial by the judge Walton.
Pettitte confirms that he is Roger Clemens’ friend. Clemens must also claim that they are friends after Andy  Pettitte’s last testimony.