BOEHM, J.
A conviction for armed robbery may be sustained even if the deadly weapon was not revealed during the robbery. Schumpert v. State, 603 N.E.2d 1359, 1364 (Ind. Ct. App. 1992). Nor is it necessary that the weapon be admitted into evidence at trial. Brown v. State, 266 Ind. 82, 86, 360 N.E.2d 830, 833 (1977). It is, however, necessary that there be evidence to support the finding that the defendant in fact was “armed with a deadly weapon,” in this case a “gun.” In this respect, Indiana’s statute requires more than its counterparts in some other states which elevate robbery based not only on the fact of use of a weapon, but also, for example, on the perception of the victim that the defendant was armed even if there was in fact no weapon.
. . . [O]ur statute has broadly defined “deadly weapon” to include unloaded firearms, and convictions for armed robberies with blank or plugged guns have been upheld. Barber v. State 418 N.E.2d 563, 568 (Ind. Ct. App. 1981); Rogers v. State, 537 N.E.2d 481, 484-85 (Ind. 1989). There is therefore no requirement under Indiana law that the victim be actually in danger of being shot. Presumably this reflects the view that use of a firearm as a club is possible, and the mere display of a firearm can provoke reaction in others that risk severe injury either by panic or attempted retaliation. Despite the broadened definition of “deadly weapon,” Indiana’s statute . . . requires that the person actually possess the weapon at the time of the crime. And in Gray’s case the information required the weapon to be a “gun.”
We turn now to the question whether the evidence is sufficient to establish that Gray pos-sessed a gun in either or both of these incidents. Stacey Dodge testified with respect to the object in Gray’s pocket in the Arby’s robbery that she “figured it was gun,” “thought it was a gun,” and saw “something that could have been a gun.” But she also testified that she never saw a firearm. Stacey Clark saw a black handle in Gray’s pocket and “assumed it was a gun.” She said that Gray instructed her to stay calm and “no one would get hurt.” But Clark also testified that she did not see a firearm and “did not know if [Gray] had a gun.” In short, none of the Arby’s witnesses testified that they saw a gun in Gray’s jacket. Cf. Harvey v. State, 542 N.E.2d 198, 200 (Ind. 1989) (evidence was sufficient to sustain armed robbery conviction where, among other things, victim testified, “I saw it was a gun.”).
The Long John Silver’s witnesses testified similarly to the Arby’s witnesses. Ella Henley never saw a gun but thought Gray had one in his pocket. Henley “was afraid that he might just, you know, reflex might pull the trigger . . . .” Kathleen Doss testified that Gray “made it to look like” he had a firearm. And Thomas Jones testified that he never saw a firearm during the robbery but that Gray “made us believe that [he] had a gun.”
The defendant’s statement or implication that he had a weapon is itself evidence that he was in fact armed. White v. State, 455 N.E.2d 329, 332 (Ind. 1983); see also Munsey v. State, 421 N.E.2d 1115, 1117 (Ind. 1981) (finding sufficient evidence defendant was armed where victim did not see weapon but felt sharp instrument on her neck and defendant told victim “if [she] moved they’d cut [her] head off”); Lyda v. State, 272 Ind. 15, 17, 395 N.E.2d 776, 778 (1979) (defendant, inter alia, told victim he had a gun); Owens v. State, 497 N.E.2d 230, 231-32 (Ind. 1986) (defendant, inter alia, gave note to victim stating he had a gun).
Although no one testified to seeing a gun, in both cases Gray communicated that he was armed. Gray’s statement at Long John Silver’s that Jones would end up getting himself shot is substantive, if not conclusive, evidence that Gray had a gun in his pocket when he robbed Long John Silver’s. [Footnote omitted.] Gray’s conduct and statements in the Arby’s robbery were less clear but nonetheless permitted the jury to infer that Gray had communicated to the victim that he had a gun. His keeping his hand in his pocket and statements that “no one would get hurt” if the employees cooperated clearly implied that he could and would injure those who resisted, and the cooperation of the employees who outnumbered Gray four-to-one is evidence that they believed he was armed. Their belief is not sufficient to establish armed robbery, but it is evidence that Gray communicated that he was armed.
Without more, Gray’s statements and conduct at both stores would be sufficient to permit the jury to find that he was in fact armed at the time of both offenses. The chain of events following Gray’s flight from the Long John Silver’s demonstrates otherwise as to that robbery. Gray was arrested almost immediately after leaving the Long John Silver’s, and police found no firearm on Gray’s person, in his car, or at the scene of the crime. Under these circumstances, it is impossible to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Gray was in fact armed at the time of the Long John Silver’s robbery. . . . .
In sum, Gray was spotted by Officer Durbin as he was exiting the Long John Silver’s, and was arrested approximately ten to twelve seconds later only 200 feet away from the restaurant. Gray and his automobile were searched at the time of his arrest, and money was found but no weapon. No gun was found in the surrounding area, but an electric shaver in the pocket in which restaurant employees assumed Gray was concealing a weapon. We believe that the limited timeframe, the proximity of the arrest, the police’s failure to recover a gun in the area, and the discovery of the shaver in Gray’s jacket together preclude any finding beyond a reasonable doubt that Gray was in fact armed with a gun at Long John Silver’s. We agree with Judge Barnes that “all of the evidence and all of the reasonable inferences therefrom lead to just one conclusion,” “namely that Gray used an electric shaver, not a gun, to rob the Long John Silver’s.” . . . We thus hold the evidence insufficient as a matter of law to sustain Gray’s enhanced convictions on the counts charging robbery and confinement at Long John Silver’s.
Shepard, C.J., and Dickson, Sullivan, Rucker, JJ., concur.