Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): that the court applied the correct standard in making its determination, we will not disturb the court's conclusion that there was sufficient evidence for the consent issue to go to the jury. The victim testified that she either told Defendant that "it hurt" and to "stop" or told him, "No." The victim recounted that she held her arms in such a way as to stop Defendant from continuing to touch her inappropriately. The victim testified that she thought she should scream and that in her mind she was seream-ing but no sound came out. Nonetheless, at one point Defendant asked her to be quiet, so as not to disturb other customers in neighboring rooms. "14 Defendant contends that the vie-tim's testimony was inherently unbelievable. See State v. Robbins, 2009 UT 23, ¶ 16, 210 P.3d 288 (<HOLDING>). We agree that there were some inconsistencies 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that where testimony is inherently improbable the court may choose to disregard it (B) holding that a court is not bound to accept testimony at face value even when it is uncontroverted if it is improbable unreasonable or questionable internal citation omitted (C) holding that it may not (D) holding that an immigration judge may base a credibility determination on the lack of corroborating evidence if the judge also encounters inconsistencies in testimony contradictory evidence or inherently improbable testimony (E) holding the tax court not bound to accept taxpayers uncontradicted testimony if it found the testimony to be improbable unreasonable or questionable
Output (English): holding that a court is not bound to accept testimony at face value even when it is uncontroverted if it is improbable unreasonable or questionable internal citation omitted