Does Deputy Whiting's testimony about vandalism contradict his testimony about robbery and prohibited firearm possession?

There was no basis for jurors to believe Deputy Whiting's testimony about vandalism but not his testimony about the other four offenses, particularly robbery and prohibited firearm possession. (Cf. People v. Covarrubias, supra, 1 Cal.5th at p. 880 [no reason for the jurors to believe the victim's testimony that the defendant stole handgun but not other property].) There was similarly no basis for the jury to find that the "low level vandalism" was a "chief" or "principal" occupation of the gang,

Page 40