A man wanted to enter a cafe in Macksville, New South Wales; so he used a weapon to try to get in. Earlier he had raided a butchers shop and had taken a chicken. He decided to use the chicken to bash his way into the cafe.
There was no one around at the time. The thief gave himself away when he had to phone emergency services: he injured himself when trying to throw the chicken.
The man will face Kempsey Local Court. He was charged with break and enter offences, police alleging that he attacked a premises with a weapon, a chicken.
Though widely accepted in law courts it is well known that witness evidence is suspect. Even victims in many cases get it wrong. A querk in humans beings is the ability to identify members of one's own race, for the most part, but the noticable inability to recognize people of other races. The phrase "you all look alike" is relevant here.
What people see can be distorted by a felon carrying a weapon. Human perception is still based on how our ancestors saw danger. An opponent carrying a weapon was more dangerous so was perceived as being big and strong.
A current study shows that a witness describing someone with a gun said the gun carrier was larger and taller than he/she actually was. This brings into question prevailing theories on memory. Could a person be seen as being bigger if more aggression was shown without a weapon?