Case ID: f-appx_462/html/0653-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Amara KAMARA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 07-72032.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Argued and Submitted June 9, 2011.
    Filed June 20, 2011.
    Mark B. Nerheim, Esquire, Seattle, WA, for Petitioner.
    OIL, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security San Francisco, CA, WWS-District Counsel, Esquire, Immigration and Naturalization Service Office of the District Counsel Seattle, WA, for Respondent.
    Before: REINHARDT, W. FLETCHER, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
   MEMORANDUM

Amara Kamara, a native and citizen of the Sierra Leone, petitions for review of the BIA’s decision denying his petition for asylum, withholding of removal, CAT protection, and humanitarian asylum. We deny the petition for review.

The BIA found that Kamara was not credible because, among other things, he testified inconsistently about his father’s death and his mother’s behavior after his father was killed. Because his father’s death was a central event in Kamara’s claim of persecution, any significant, unexplained discrepancies in his testimony about it go to the heart of his claim. Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1043 (9th Cir.2001).

Kamara said at some points that his father was killed when he attempted to keep RUF rebels from entering the family compound, and at other points that he was killed for refusing to join the rebel forces. Kamara also gave different versions of his mother’s reaction before admitting that he did not know what had happened to her. Although Kamara was given many chances to reconcile the inconsistent statements, he did not do so. The record does not compel reversal of the BIA’s conclusion that Ka-mara’s inability to describe one of the central events in his history indicated that he was not testifying credibly. See Don v. Gonzales, 476 F.3d 738, 741-42 (9th Cir.2007).

Because substantial evidence supports the BIA’s adverse credibility finding, Ka-mara has not shown that he is entitled to asylum, withholding of removal, CAT protection, or humanitarian asylum.

PETITION DENIED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.