These, of course, are key vulnerabilities lawyers work to uncover in cross-examination.

Interesting that whether a prior inconsistent statement is evidence of truthfulness or a lie apparently depends on the circumstances.

If it was a “spontaneous correction” and is stated as such (e.g. “I just remembered, I actually got that phone call Sunday morning, not Saturday like I said before, because now I remember I was getting ready for church when the phone rang”) it’s a sign of truthfulness.

If it comes out only when the story is being retold on cross or under further questioning, with no recognition it is inconsistent, it signals a lie.

Just my guess based on the article, which is actually quite brief.