The Ninth Circuit has has determined that it was permissible for an Immigration Judge to rely on inconsistencies between an asylum applicant’s in-court testimony and the information contained in a record of his border interview with Customs and Border Protection and of his credible fear interview with an asylum officer. The court determined that “there were sufficient indicia of reliability” because “the interviews were conducted under oath, with contemporaneous notes containing the questions asked, and transcribed either by a French-speaking officer or with the aid of an interpreter. “
The full text of Mukulumbutu v. Barr can be found here:
https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2020/10/13/19-72499.pdf