The opinion
BELSOME, J.,
concurs with reasons.
| lAlthough I concur in the result, I disagree with the majority’s determination that the scenario in the instant case is analogous to State v. Galindo. In Galin-do, the victim and witness both admitted at trial that their statements regarding the alleged criminal behavior were coached and subsequently recanted. State v. Galindo, 2006-1090 (La.App. 4 Cir. 10/3/07) , 968 So.2d 1102, 1120 (Belsome, J., dissenting). In sharp contrast to the facts and circumstances in Galindo, the victim in the instant case testified consistently as to the actual criminal acts; the discrepancies in the victim’s statements are all inconsequential. The factfinder weighed these discrepancies in light of all of the evidence and concluded that her testimony was credible. I respectfully concur.