Opinion ID: 765209
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Level of Specificity of Petitioner's Testimony

Text: 47 Finally, the IJ was suspicious of Petitioner's testimony because of its lack of specificity concerning matters outside the ambit of the newspaper article: 48 [V]irtually all of the details given in [Petitioner's] testimony also appeared in the newspaper article which [he] presented to corroborate his testimony. Normally, the Court would see this as a positive factor in support of [Petitioner's] claim. On the other hand, [Petitioner] did not give many details which were not contained in the article . . . . 49 The record does not contradict the IJ's conclusion that the article provided most of the details of the central events that Petitioner recounted in his testimony.