What is the test for relying on inconsistent statements in a civil case?

The agency reasonably relied on Singh's inconsistent statements regarding whether his girlfriend's father was involved in the beating, who accompanied him to report the attack to police, and whether he was beaten with guns. See 8 U.S.C. 1158(b)(1)(B)(iii). Singh did not provide compelling explanations for these inconsistencies. See Majidi v. Gonzales, 430 F.3d 77, 80 (2d Cir. 2005) ("A petitioner must do more than offer a plausible explanation for his inconsistent statements to secure relief; he must demonstrate that a reasonable fact-finder would be compelled

Page 4

to credit his testimony." (internal quotation marks omitted)).