the complainant and the Petroleum Club inspired the complainant to bring forth new details of the sexual assault. The complainant also allegedly filed a lawsuit against the Petroleum Club and appellant. This information was brought before the jury. The complainant testified that she had talked to attorneys regarding a civil suit against the Petroleum Club and appellant. She also stated her attorney had made a settlement demand to the Petroleum Club. Thus, the jury, knowing of the complainant’s potential lawsuit against the Petroleum Club and appellant, could draw their own conclusion as to its effect, if any, on her credibility in this case. The jury disregarded appellant’s defense as was its right. Moore v. State, 804 S.W.2d 165, 166 (TexApp.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1991, no pet.) (<HOLDING>). The jury is the sole judge of the credibility
holding that a district court was entitled to accept or reject testimony on the basis of the witnesses demeanor and candor or lack thereof and contradictions in the witnesses testimony holding jury is entitled to accept the states version of the facts and reject appellants version or reject any of the witnesses testimony holding that the jury is the tribunal to determine the weight to be accorded the testimony of the witnesses and accept or reject the valuations placed thereupon recognizing that a judge sitting as a factfinder may reject a witnesss uncontradicted testimony holding that the alj is free to reject the opinion of any physician when the evidence supports a contrary conclusion