context: Moreover, Pando was not available for cross-examination concerning his assertion that he had been threatened. Herrera and similar cases cited by the defendant are simply inapposite.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 783 F.2d 1091, 1098
citation_a.parenthetical: defendant sought to testify in court regarding a threat he had received
citation_a.sentence: See, e.g., United States v. Wright, 783 F.2d 1091, 1098 (D.C.Cir.1986) (defendant sought to testify in court regarding a threat he had received).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.parenthetical: when defense counsel pointed out inconsistency in witness's account, the witness was allowed to testify regarding a threat in order to explain the inconsistency
citation_b.sentence: See also United States v. Rubin, 591 F.2d 278, 283 (5th Cir.) (defendant sought to testify in court regarding statements made to him), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 864, 100 S.Ct. 133, 62 L.Ed.2d 87 (1979); United States v. Scandifia, 390 F.2d 244, 251 (2d Cir.1968) (when defense counsel pointed out inconsistency in witness’s account, the witness was allowed to testify regarding a threat in order to explain the inconsistency), vacated on other grounds, 394 U.S. 310, 89 S.Ct. 1163, 22 L.Ed.2d 297 (1969).