What was expected to be a shining moment for the federal government in the Roger Clemens trial on perjury and obstruction of justice charges has turned out to be a major disappointment. The government is trying to prove that Clemens lied about his use of anabolic steroids and human growth hormone (hGH) before Congress. The personable Andy Pettitte was supposed to tell the jury that he was certain that Roger Clemens admitted to using hGH during a conversation around 1999 or 2000. Pettitte shocked prosecutors when he essentially told Clemen’s legal team that he wasn’t sure.
Why were prosecutors shocked? Pettitte gave a sworn statement for the infamous 2008 Congressional hearings on anabolic steroids in Major League Baseball in which he clearly stated his certainty regarding Clemens hGH admission. He gave a different account this week at the E. Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse in Washington D.C.
Michael Attanasio, one of Clemens’ defense attorneys, cross-examined Pettitte and asked him, “Sitting here now, you’re 50-50 that you misunderstood him, is that fair?” And Pettitte responded affirmatively.
Federal prosecutors did not know what to do. They pretended that Pettitte’s conflicted testimony never happened when he was questioned once again on redirect.
U.S. District Court Judge Reggie Walton chastised the Assistant United States Attorney Steve Durham for failing to address the conflicted testimony.
“I was waiting for you to ask, and you didn’t ask that,” Walton said. “My understanding is that (Pettitte’s) position is at this time, he is conflicted. . . . His testimony now before the jury is ‘I don’t know.’”
Roger Clemens’ attorneys seized the moment in the government’s embarrassment. Attanasio submitted documents to Judge Walton requesting that jurors disregard the testimony of Pettitte since there was a 50/50 chance that Pettitte misunderstood the conversation. The 50/50 chance of misunderstanding the hGH admission is consistent with Clemens’ claim that Pettitte “misremembered” details of the exchange.
The government filed a response stating that the jury continued to be allowed to consider the testimony of Pettitte. ASUSA Dunham wrote that federal evidentiary rules allow juries to “pick and choose” which testimony to believe. In other words, he hopes the jury disregards the inconsistent testimony that fails to support the government’s case.
The testimony by Andy Pettitte (and his wife) have given prosecutors all sorts of embarrassing problems during the Clemens steroid trials. During the first trial, the government’s blunder of introducing inadmissible evidence by Laura Pettitte led to the declaration of a mistrial by Judge Walton.
Pettitte still considers himself “friends” with Clemens. Clemens probably does too after Pettitte’s latest testimony.
Photo credit: Keith Allison on Flickr
Source:
Vinton, N. (May 2, 2012). Andy Pettitte backs off prior testimony on Roger Clemens’ HGH use, admits it’s ’50-50′ that he may have misunderstood Rocket. Retrieved from http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/i-team/andy-pettitte-backs-prior-testimony-roger-clemens-hgh-50-50-misunderstood-rocket-article-1.1071369
