the practice once we legend is a fundamental human right the united states protects refugees who have fled their come country on the account of religious their religious beliefs and persecution and because of their religious beliefs religious minorities are most at risk of religious persecution at the hands of the government is my correction is entitled to asylum because of the severe physical and emotional pain that she suffered in armenia on account of her faith as a jehovah's witness well that's kind of cut to the chase on their second this really has to turn on the credibility finding here and you know for the purposes of argument let's assume that you know if i mean obviously if a woman's weight as a result of persecution for being a jehovah's witness that's going to get her you know to the place where she can establish caste persecution but you have an adverse credibility finding here and there are there inconsistency in the testimony with regard and and so i think that the i had concerns about whether it was on account of but that's just on the advice credibility on the dates you know you've got a number of places where she's off by a year and some of the being off by a year would put her in a problem where the incident will go higher if she stopped by a year depending on what your you believe she wouldn't have been able to be present when that the doctors told her that she was raped as opposed to her having any recollection to want to address some of their you know because we would have to be compelled to find otherwise or it has not supported by substantial evidence and if i guess what i'm saying why aren't there are two ways that you can look at this testimony well walking specifically through the adverse credibility finding which is in the record starting at forty  forty nine and the i just found that there was a lack of detail on significant events and discrepancies as to keep dates as to the first detention and when she went back and forth to armenia and russia and on those points she made an adverse credibility finding as we've set forth in our brief it's not exactly clear what those points are because she then goes on to talk about the need for more details with respect to the attack at work her beliefs as hopeless witnesses being the jehovah's witness and the difficulty with regard to the rape and i think in this case the days are not significant she's testifying nine years later and there is consistency the only consistency comes up on cross examination  confused of course she is testifying through translator there are multiple instances in the transcript where the translator gets the wrong and they were corrected such as when she says hello how old she is when she gets off by a year regularly it seems to be but if when she says she was baptized in march or april one thousand nine hundred ninety two when she says that that would mean that she was baptized before she met sister gomar and then but then she also says the sister  harsh the person that introduced her to the religion and then when she gets mixed up on the dates on another incident it would be it one interpretation of it would mean that she couldn't have been present when sister go her was attacked so that you know i'm seeing two interpretations there but also in terms of the i j a is there listening then i'd say takes one interpretation saying well i think that you got the date because you're not telling the truth and witness just responding to whether the dates really go to the heart of the claim which is i think part of your question here because she is she is off by a year i don't think that given the consistency between the asylum application and her testimony as to specifically what happened and what was said by the police during the attack i think it's difficult to then say that the dates go to the heart of the claim and actually the i j a didn't find that she was concerned that she actually wasn't there and was in russia when the attack happened that sisters return to armenia from russia one day though i think you need to cover all the issues that were raised by judge callaghan initially i'd tend to think the daves don't go to the heart of the matter but there are other issues also know just go ahead i've just say i think you should try to address all of the issues not simply the dates looking at all of the components of the adverse credibility finding do said there's a lot was a lack of sufficient detail and she did express concern about the application using the word rapid two minutes but i would use your time and i'll give you one minute for rebuttal beaten and assaulted and that being inconsistent with her testimony that she was right that this was confirmed by the gynecological exam that  finding by her or to the extent it is an adverse credibility finding isn't supported by substantial evidence on this record in fact the i j a did not give full credence to the asylum application events that is a very significant event even if the rape were to be discredited she gave significant consistent testimony both in her asylum application and then on the stand about what happened that night of november fifteenth about what was said which linked it back to being on account of her religion and that is the heart of her claim that she was attacked physically assaulted whether it was rape or not although the record does support in english the use of the word assault means rape this was through a translator her asylum and i'm curious just from this standpoint i know that are issues you know there's always the argument that a woman would be i has to tend to report her rape but she does say that sister go harvest right and then she uses rape her sister go higher and she is assault for herself the translator used rape and assault it's a translated asylum application but she does never say i said she says she said assault her application doesn't change she said it should have been in there when she was asked why is it not in your application she answers that well that should have been in there that she was raped her here her hearing testimony was when she was asked why did the application say that you were raped she have a fight it'll just take a moment by my understanding is that the immigration judge made the negative credibility finding relating to the  negative credibility finding as to whether or not she was a joke this witness that is correct there is a sentence in which she expresses that she has difficulty finding sh religion or did it in homes and in armenia or in the u s am i correct that we have to accept the petitioner's testimony about being a job as witness correction because there was no negative credibility determination on that that is correct both under the code of federal regulations that apply to this case and then under the case law that it must be deemed true the petition for review should be denied because the board of immigration appeals properly affirmed the decision of the immigration judges denial of asylum withholding of removal and relief under the convention against torture well now on th summary of for a month you may have to be prepared to address that while if you need to you can you know what will call for a briefing but i would really like you do address the negative been in the beatings and the rape and the dates but i didn't see where the i j a made an expressed negative credibility determination on her being a job as witness on your honor i would like to rock the entire decision to the extent that the i j a went into detail as to the discrepancies that those were all negative credibility findings regardless of whether the specific word we're making a negative credibility finding here and there's no requirement that those specific words be used within each paragraph as the i j a is going through and talking about how there's a one year difference between when she said she was that ties and when she was actually a goes into great detail with respect to the discrepancies between her alleged status as a jehovah's witness and her inconsistent statements regarding her membership in that chair which with respect to her worship here in the united states she testified that she worshipped at kingdom hall she did not know the address of kingdom hall to the extent that there didn't you say that someone else didn't you say someone else took her there and she knew how to alleging that she's participating in this religion and there was an adverse credibility finding there was the expectation that there should be some corroborating evidence of her membership in the church and this court has taken the position that membership in a church is a very easy thing to establish through through certificates for back to perhaps cancelled checks for donation to the church she danced around the pledge card from russia correct no transfusion card and i you know i have to say i think that's the best evidence that the cheaper sense and it's you know arguably i don't know why someone would carry a card like that and mask that's what they put it that's not i generally people don't have those she testified that she didn't see the need for another clark and you know having a car even in russian i would say in most hospitals there wouldn't be joy to find someone who would be able to read a russian card by i guess but the part of your argument that i'm having the most trouble with is the argument that we should view the decision as a negative credibility determination on every on all the years shoes because i thought we had a president that i'm negative credibility determination was arguments with respect to credibility in that case and this particular case is very different because the i c has gone through and very specifically talks about the discrepancies with respect to her status as a jehovah's witness gone into the fact that there's a one year discrepancy as to when she was baptized the i j a went into very specific analysis of her inconsistent inconsistent statements regarding the date and the reasons for her departure from armenia she's asked by about a year there and i just really see the need additional findings with respect to her statements regarding the alleged rape and how they were quite vague and there's also information that she left armenia and left her daughters in armenia for six months while she vacation it's reasonable for the i j a to conclude that this is not the havior of someone who believes that that their daughters are subject to persecution and that women in this religion are again these are all decisions that may not be well organized but to the extent that the judge is going through and bringing all of these things up that there is a clear adverse credibility finding there's a reason that the judge went through all of that analysis in the oral decision that clearly there were there with credibility issues counsel i want to ask you something in terms of options that the  have first of all if we're not sure of what the scope of the i j a is negative credibility determination as i you know i've seen cases where a panel has that they're only accepting the credibility of germination is going so far and beyond beyond that if they think the case is made out remanding for further proceedings accepting her testimony is true but i mean do we have the ability if we're not confident in what the i j a a wanted confirmation of her membership in the church to ask for further evidence on that and to get to continue to continue the hearing with this petitioner and to ask her to present evidence of her membership in the church i know you can't always get evidence from armenia but certainly she she could have with the continued hearing presented evidence other evidence relating to her asylum and and to the extent she appeared at the at the hearing presented only her testimony did not have affidavits from anyone in the church here no corroborating evidence here  there there's no there's no authority that we're aware of that would require the judge to continue hearing at that time similarly if this were a case that had gone through a regular trial it's a standard type of a trial there it would just make it difficult for docket control in terms of saying well this neither side has not presented sufficient evidence so i'm going to continue the trial or have yet another trials for you to bring forth additional evidence this hearing was her credited that she would meet her burden and so i guess i have a sort of first finer point on my question to you well when it's when someone police because because the doctors informed her that she had been raped after gynecological examination that's inconsistent with her testimony that she was conscious and that she was but then she was later told by others that she had been raped you know you don't we can look at the record you don't need to if you don't have it right at your fingertips we can look at the record did you have any other question stretchable no i do all right thank you  she's saying she was conscious during her gynecological exam but my recollection although i didn't find that page immediately is that false in her asylum application and during her testimony she does say that she was curing that and of her beating but i haven't been able to put my finger yet on the application of the testimony on the on the beating point or you to give us that it and this is where it says quote i have lost my consciousness they had on my face and my head i don't remember anything else i just woke up and i remember my daughters were crying so that that is of let me just ask you does and i have any duty to give a continuance to permit corroborating evidence when the burden of proof is just not met because of credibility determination i'm not aware of precedent directly on that point but the show a fair a case that twenty third ten ten seventy talks about the fact that  has a duty similar to a social security perceiving to fill in any gaps in the record and allow an opportunity for filling in those gaps unfortunately in national security where is social security faces question precisely about whether the proper remedy would be a continuance in that situation it just states that there is a duty on the i j a to develop the record particularly if the