May 2, 2012, 9:12 AM EDT
UPDATE: Well, it was nice while it lasted, but Pettitte’s testimony just became pretty useless.
9:12 AM: There were no surprises in Andy Pettitte’s testimony at the Roger Clemens trial yesterday. Now it’s just a matter of whether the jury believes the 1999 Roger Clemens or the 2005 Roger Clemens to whom Pettitte spoke:
Without emotion, as if he were facing a particularly tough batter, Pettitte said that Clemens admitted to him in 1999 or 2000 that he had used human growth hormone, which is now banned by baseball.
“Roger had mentioned to me that he had taken H.G.H. and that it could help with recovery,” Pettitte said. “You know, that’s all I really remember about the conversation.”
And, Pettitte said without flinching, that Clemens accused him in 2005 of remembering that conversation inaccurately. Clemens said it was his wife, not him, who had used H.G.H.
“Obviously, I was a little flustered because I thought that he had told me he did,” Pettitte said. “My reaction after that was, well, no good asking him or talking to him about this now, and I just walked out, end of the conversation.” …
That’s basically the crux of it all. That and a little bit of Pettitte’s own history with HGH and whether the jury will assume that, due to their closeness and the company they kept, they were both doing the same stuff.
It’s easy to convince yourself, based on what we all know what was going on in 2005, that Clemens changed his story to Pettitte because he was aware — based on the famous Rafael Palmiero/Mark McGwire hearings — that others would be called on to talk about drug use and he wanted to start laying the groundwork for denials. It’s just as easy to say “man, how dumb would Clemens be to change his story in 2005 when, if he was really using, others would be in a position to say so.” Now, I think Clemens is dumb, actually, but the jury isn’t gonna get to hear about a lot of that stuff, so it may not matter here.
Which is another way to say that it’s hard to say what the jury will take away from Pettitte’s testimony. And makes me continue to believe that the only thing that matters in this case is what Brian McNamee says, how he says it and what the jury thinks of it.
- Bryce Harper walks in all four of his plate appearances, scores four runs 0
- ESPN pulls Curt Schilling off broadcasts for rest of regular season and Wild Card game 91
- David Ortiz is more likely to be boned in Hall of Fame voting for being a DH than for PED stuff 124
- And That Happened: Wednesday’s scores and highlights 74
- The Marlins are going to change everything except their biggest problem this offseason 53
- Drooling over Miguel Sano’s incredible numbers through 50 career games 35
- Matt Williams puts up another strong performance in his quest to get himself fired 105
- Settling the Scores: Tuesday’s results 81
- Sarah Palin sticks up for Curt Schilling, tells ESPN to “stick to sports” (266)
- David Ortiz is more likely to be boned in Hall of Fame voting for being a DH than for PED stuff (126)
- Matt Williams puts up another strong performance in his quest to get himself fired (105)
- David Ortiz tweets his happiness about the Deflategate decision (98)
- ESPN pulls Curt Schilling off broadcasts for rest of regular season and Wild Card game (98)