had changed hairstyle and grown a moustache); United States v. Barrett, supra at 1086 (defendant appeared clean-shaven at trial); United States v. Farnsworth, supra at 1160 (defendant had grown a full beard and the day of the robbery had worn a scarf over his face); United States v. Lucas, 898 F.2d 606, 610 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 838, 111 S.Ct. 112, 112 L.Ed.2d 81 (1990) (defendant appeared clean-shaven at trial); United States v. Towns, 913 F.2d 434, 445 (7th Cir.1990) (defendant had worn stocking cap, sunglasses, and bulky clothing to the robbery); United States v. Ellis, 121 F.3d 908, 927 (4th Cir.1997), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1068, 118 S.Ct. 738, 139 L.Ed.2d 674 (1998) (defendants were wearing masks and hooded sweatshirts). Cf. United States v. LaPierre, supra at 1465 (<HOLDING>). Commonwealth v. Pleas, 49 Mass.App.Ct. 321,
holding it error to admit testimony where among other things there was no evidence that defendants appearance had changed since the time of the robbery holding the evidence sufficient to establish the defendants knowing possession of a firearm beyond a reasonable doubt when among other things the defendant admitted to a law enforcement officer that he had acquired the shotgun for his protection and that officers testimony went uncontradicted at trial holding defendants participation in violent robbery and his fear of codefendants among other facts provided sufficient evidence that murder should have been anticipated as result of robbery holding that defendants failed to carry burden of proof to show that plaintiffs failed to mitigate damages when among other things they offered no evidence contradicting the plaintiffs evidence holding that pleading was insufficient where the plaintiff failed to among other things set forth the dates of any fraudulent statements