Singh
Singh v. Ashcroft
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Pal Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of an order by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) deny *265 ing his application for asylum and -withholding of removal. Because we find that the sixteen alleged inconsistencies cited by the immigration judge were either trivial or not contradictory, we grant Singh’s petition.
Most of the “inconsistencies,” on review of the record, do not exist. Contrary to the immigration judge’s opinion, for example, Singh consistently described his conversation with police prior to his first arrest in 1992. Singh unvaryingly identified three policemen at the scene of this arrest, and it does not undermine his credibility that on cross-examination he specified that one of the three belonged to the Central Reserve Police (CRP). Further, Singh did not contradict himself when describing his activities putting up election boycott posters, when on direct examination he listed villages he had already visited, and on cross-examination he described where he planned to go. Nor is it contradictory for Singh to state first that his Indian doctor had his medical records, and then explain that although he asked his family to try…