Mistrial declared in Roger Clemens case
The judge overseeing the perjury trial of famed former pitcher Roger Clemens declared a mistrial Thursday after prosecutors played a portion of a video that the judge deemed prejudicial.
U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton said prosecutors erred in playing video of Congressional testimony referencing statements made by the wife of a “critical” witness in the case.
“I am very troubled by this,” said Walton said before declaring a mistrial.
The declaration came on just the second day of testimony and after it took a week to pick a jury.
Walton said he would hear arguments in coming weeks about whether prosecutors can re-try Clemens, one of the most-decorated pitchers in baseball history, without violating his constitutional right against double jeopardy.
The request for a mistrial came from Clemens’ lawyers after prosecutors mistakenly played a portion of Congressional testimony that referenced the wife of former pitcher Andy Pettitte, a friend and former teammate of Clemens.
Pettitte told Congressional investigators Clemens had confided in him in 1999 or 2000 that he had taken a performance-enhancing substance. Pettitte also told Congressional investigators that he told his wife about that conversation when it took place. She provided an affidavit to Congress backing her husband’s claims.
Walton ruled that prosecutors could not raise Laurie Pettitte’s statements before the jury because he didn’t think it would be fair to Clemens.
On Thursday morning, prosecutors played Congressional testimony of Rep. Elijah Cummings asking Clemens questions about his alleged use of steroids and Human Growth Hormone. Cummings then quoted Laurie Pettitte’s affidavit to Congress and talked about how Pettitte seemed like a reliable witness.
Before defense lawyers could object, Walton ordered a halt to the proceedings, dismissed the jury and then excoriated prosecutors for violating his order preventing any mention of what Pettitte may have told his wife.
The judge called Pettitte a “critical witness” and said such information may unfairly bolster his credibility with jurors. He sharply criticized prosecutors, accusing them of making a mistake he would not expect from a novice attorney.
“A first-year law student would know you can’t bolster the credibility of one witness with clearly inadmissible evidence,” Walton said.
Irritated with prosecutors, Walton stopped the proceedings. He said he was worried that the information on the video would unfairly bolster Pettitte’s credibility with jurors.
“I don’t see how I can unring the bell,” he added, before leaving the bench to discuss the matter with a “colleague.”
Federal prosecutors barely got a chance to defend themselves before Walton left the courtroom. They had been admonished during opening statements for violating another order by Walton precluding them from introducing testimony from other ball players about their use of HGH.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Steven Durham said he had given the tapes to the defense lawyers and they hadn’t objected to them. He also noted that the comments about Laura Pettitte were in the context of a broader discussion with Clemens about his own denials about HGH and steroid use.
Clemens said at the Congressional hearing that Pettitte had misheard or misremembered their conversation and he asserted that he had never admitted to Pettitte that he had taken HGH.
A clearly chagrined Durham also told Walton that “we are not evading any responsibility” shortly before Walton left the bench.
This post has been updated.
No comments:
Post a Comment