Disappointment of Roger Clemens’ prosecutors

The desire of the federal government connected with the case of Roger Clemens was following: they hoped to prove that this athlete had lied before the Congress about usage of anabolic steroids and HGH. But the government couldn’t achieve this goal. It was expected that Andy Pettitte would confirm that Roger Clemens had admitted that he had taken the prohibited 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 confirm that Roger Clemens had used steroids and HGH because he was not sure.
Actually, were the prosecutors of Roger Clemens disappointed by the testimony of Andy Pettitte? This person swore for the 2008 Congressional hearings on administration of steroids in the Major League Baseball that Roger Clemens acknowledged that he had taken HGH. But he provided 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 indeed 50-50 about this factor.
When the prosecutors heard Pettitte’s answer, they didn’t know what to do. They claimed that Andy Pettitte never answered this way, when he was asked several times.
The judge Reggie Walton noted that he understood that Andy Pettitte’s answer has been conflicted. Actually, his statement 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. The attorneys concluded that he probably misunderstood the athlete Roger Clemens or he can’t remember the details of the conversation.  
The government has responded that the jury still allows taking into account the testimony of Andy Pettitte. ASUSA Dunham has pointed out that under federal rules jury is allowed to choose which testimony to believe. This person hopes that the jury will disregard the testimony that doesn’t support the government.
So, the testimony provided by Andy Pettitte and his wife led to problems. Testimonies of his wife during the first trial resulted in the declaration of a mistrial by the judge Walton.
Pettitte claims that he is a friend of Roger Clemens. Clemens must also confirm that they are friends after Andy  Pettitte’s last testimony.