Federal prosecutors are disappointed that jurors have acquitted Roger Clemens

Names of 12 persons (4 men and 8 women) that acted as jury at the governmental case against Roger Clemens were released by the judge Reggie Walton.
The government desired the jury to be convinced that Roger Clemens had lied before the Congress about usage of steroids and HGH. But since the jury didn’t believe it, the government criticized the individuals who composed the jury. Certain persons that composed the jury were interviewed.
A political activist, an art historian, a teacher of deaf children, an official of Treasury Department and an employee of the Canadian Embassy were included in the jury.
The political activist Joyce Robinson-Paul was interviewed by the New York Daily News some days after Roger Clemens was acquitted. She claimed that the jurors knew that they had to be fair to both the government and the baseball player. But they didn’t find anything that had to be prosecuted.  Later she also confirmed that the government was not able to prove their statements.
The employee of the Canadian Embassy Bradford Weaver affirmed that the government was wrong. This person noted that such cases should not be repeated. This person also confirmed that there was nothing to be pursued. Bradford Weaver was interviewed by the Associated Press. Bradford Weaver also confirmed that each juror saw from the very beginning that Clemens was not guilty of any charge. This person claimed that each juror was unanimous.
Bradford Weaver was also asked whether he thought that Roger Clemens really applied steroids. Journalists of the Associated Press also asked him whether he considered that the governmental case against Roger Clemens represented just the waste of taxpayers’ funds. But the employee of the Canadian Embassy didn’t answer the questions.
Another juror who chose not to be named noticed that the jurors were wondering how the government made the decision to waste significant sums of money during 5 years in order to prosecute the athlete. This person noted that it was impossible to understand why the prosecution lasted for five years.
Other jurors didn’t present any information.
As for federal prosecutors, they were completely disappointed. They refused to respond to the statements presented by the jurors.