In Crivens v. Roth, 172 F.3d 991, 998 (7th Cir. 1999), the Court observed that a "propensity to lie to police officers, prosecutors and even judges" is especially damaging to a witness's credibility. Id. There, one of the state's key eye-witnesses had such a propensity, which the fact-finder in the defendant's trial did not know about. Id. Crivens held that if the witness's propensity for lying to these figures had been known, "it would have perhaps given the fact-finder the reason it did not find to decide that the witness might have been lying again." Id. at 999. If the fact-finder had reached such a conclusion, "the state's case would have been severely damaged" and a different outcome may have resulted. Id.