What is the test for inferring discriminatory animus under the Employment Fairness Act?

Simply showing the employer was lying, without some evidence of discriminatory motive, is not enough to infer discriminatory animus. "The pertinent [FEHA] statutes do not prohibit lying, they prohibit discrimination." (Guz v. Bechtel National, Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 317, 361 (Guz); see also Slatkin v. University of Redlands (2001) 88 Cal.App.4th 1147, 1156.) "However, evidence that the employer's claimed reason is falsesuch as that it conflicts with other evidence, or appears to have been contrived after the factwill tend to suggest that the employer seeks to conceal the real reason for its actions, and this in turn may support an inference that the real reason was unlawful." (Mamou, supra, 165 Cal.App.4th at p. 715.)