Federal prosecutors became confused after Andy Pettitte’s testimony at court linked with Roger Clemens

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 was not able to reach this goal. It was expected that Andy Pettitte would affirm that Roger Clemens had told him that he had used the prohibited products during a conversation in 1999 or in 2000. But the affirmation of Andy Pettitee was shocking for prosecutors. He 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 man swore for the 2008 Congressional hearings on intake of steroids in the Major League Baseball that Roger Clemens admitted to administration 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 affirm 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 Clemens’ prosecutors heard Pettitte’s answer, they didn’t know what to do. They stated that Pettitte never said this way, when he was asked certain times.
The U. S. District Court 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 prosecutors’ confusion. They asked the judge to ignore the testimony of Andy Pettitte because he was 50-50. The attorneys claimed that he probably misunderstood Roger Clemens or he can’t remember 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 laws jury is allowed to choose which affirmation to believe. He hopes that the jury will ignore the testimony which doesn’t support the government.
So, the testimony provided 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 claims that he is a friend of Roger Clemens. Clemens must also claim that they are friends after Andy  Pettitte’s last testimony.