Defendant appealed a decision of the trial judge sustaining a violation of G.L. 1956 § 31-15-11 (laned roadway violation). Defendant argued that the trial judge’s decision to credit a witness’s testimony was clearly erroneous because that witness’s testimony was inconsistent with the statement he gave to the police. The Appeals Panel noted that “inconsistencies in a witness’s statement do not preclude a fact finder from accepting the testimony as credible.” As such, the Appeals Panel held that the trial judge’s decision was not clearly erroneous because the Panel “lacks the authority to assess witness credibility.” Link v. State, 633 A.2d 1345, 1348 (R.I. 1993) (citing Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Janes, 586 A.2d 536, 537 (R.I. 1991)). Accordingly, the Appeals Panel affirmed the decision of the trial judge.