(Snipped for space)
The issues you have highlighted appear to be "fog of war" kind of issues. They're not blatant lies. People get a little confused sometimes, especially in high-stress situations. Firstly, he was not under oath, was he? So this is of a different magnitude than perjury.
Second, one of your issues is with him not describing his car to NEN. Well, why would he willfully lie about something that could so easily be fact-checked? It's entirely possible he thought he had said something about his car because he thought about giving them the description, but was too worked up about the events at hand that he forgot to. I know I think I've told people things sometimes and have actually not, I've only thought about telling them.
What else, exactly are you taking into account with the walkthrough versus the NEN? You kind of just have the transcript there and then the NEN call and just say "It's obvious he lied". I don't see much of anything that's too different from what he told NEN.
It honestly sounds like nitpicking and expecting someone to remember every detail of a high-intensity event, rather than realizing that eyewitnesses are not perfect. The substance of the narratives have remained the same.