Clemens, one of baseball’s greatest pitchers, will be judged by 16 people — 12 jurors and 4 alternates — in the case that involves allegations that he lied to Congress when he said he never used performance-enhancing drugs. Those jurors are 10 women and 6 men; nine of them are black and seven are white. The judge has not yet divulged which jurors will be the alternates. Clemens, dressed in a dark suit, sat at the defense table and calmly watched the jurors take their seats in the jury box. He glanced at the jurors from time to time with a blank look on his face. In a seat at the back of the courtroom, his wife, Debbie, nonchalantly went about needlepointing an image of a butterfly. From the jury box, the jurors looked just as unfazed. They have four- to six-week trial ahead of them, and it will include hours of testimony. The panel consists of a mix of Washington residents. Some said they followed sports, though most said they did not know much about Clemens. At least two of those jurors said during their initial questioning that they were aware that this trial is Clemens’s second go-around in this court because the judge declared a mistrial to end his first trial last summer. A massive error by the prosecution ended that trial last July when it showed jurors inadmissible evidence. At that trial, the jury was comprised of 10 women and 2 men. The judge, Reggie Walton of the United States District Court, was hoping to begin opening statements Monday afternoon. Before then, though, he made a ruling that dealt a blow to the government’s case. Walton ruled that Yankees pitcher Andy Pettitte, one of the government’s star witnesses, could testify that he used human growth hormone and say that he had conversations with Clemens about Clemens’s H.G.H. use — but he could not tell the jury the source of his H.G.H. Pettitte, who has admitted to using H.G.H. for injuries in 2002 and 2005, has said he received the drug from Brian McNamee, Clemens’s trainer, in 2002. The defense sought to prevent Pettitte from mentioning McNamee at all because it would be an unfair guilt by association. The government said it was important for Pettitte’s testimony to include a mention of McNamee because the Pettitte-McNamee connection was a crucial part of the government’s narrative of the case. If Pettitte left out that part of the story, prosecutors said, it would leave the jury wondering from whom Pettitte obtained the drug. In the end, the judge ruled that the jury could not have that question answered in order to prevent prejudice against Clemens.
juicy couture outlet juicy couture juicy couture charms
没有评论:
发表评论