commits the offense of official oppression if, acting under color of his office, he intentionally subjects another to arrest or detention that he knows is unlawful. Id. § 39.03(a)(1). 2 . There is conflicting evidence about when Welch learned of Teague's investigation of Wess Jones. Teague testified that he reported the matter to Welch shortly after he began his investigation. Welch testified that he first learned of the matter on December 19. 3 . Although Wess Jones testified that he changed the report with Burkett's tantamount approval and Teague’s help, and possibly at Slabotsky's direction, the jury was free to disbelieve Wess Jones's testimony, believe ap-pellees' testimony, and resolve any inconsistencies in the evidence. See McGalliard v. Kuhlmann, 722 S.W.2d 694, 697 (Tex.1986) (<HOLDING>). 4 . In light of our holdings regarding
holding that jurors may consider inconsistencies and deficiencies in testimony when assessing witness credibility holding that inconsistencies in the summary judgment evidence of a single witness create a fact issue holding jury is sole judge of witness credibility and may believe some witnesses and refuse to believe others holding that trier of fact may believe one witness disbelieve others and resolve inconsistencies in the testimony of any witness holding that promises made by the prosecution to a witness in exchange for that witness testimony relate directly to the credibility of the witness