Andy Pettitte claimed that he was not sure whether Roger Clemens had told him about usage of prohibited drugs

The desire of the federal government linked with the case of Roger Clemens was following: they hoped to prove that this person had lied before the Congress about application of anabolic steroids and HGH. But the government was not able to achieve this goal. It was expected that Andy Pettitte would confirm that Roger Clemens had told him that he had taken the banned medications during a conversation in 1999 or in 2000. But Pettitte shocked the prosecutors. This man claimed 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 usage of steroids in the Major League Baseball that Roger Clemens admitted to usage of HGH. But he pronounced opposite statements at the Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse in Washington.
Michael Attanasio, a defense attorney for Roger Clemens, asked Andy Pettitte whether he may say that he is 50-50 that he has understood wrongly Roger Clemens about HGH. Andy Pettitte answered that he is indeed 50-50 about this aspect.
When the prosecutors heard the answer of Andy Pettitte, they didn’t know what to do. They stated that Andy Pettitte never said this way, when he was asked certain times.
The U. S. District Court Judge Reggie Walton claimed 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 prosecutors’ confusion. They asked the judge to brush aside Andy Pettitte’s testimony because he was 50-50. The attorneys claimed that he probably misunderstood Roger Clemens or he forgot 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 rules jury is allowed to choose which affirmation to believe. This person hopes that the jury will disregard the testimony which doesn’t support the government.
Thus, the testimony provided by Andy Pettitte and his wife caused problems. Testimonies of Andy’s wife during the first trial resulted in the declaration of a mistrial by the judge Walton.
Pettitte affirms that he is a friend of Roger Clemens. Clemens must also claim that they are friends after the last testimony of Andy Pettitte.