The recovered necklace had a broken chain. From that statement, the trial judge could infer that appellant took personal property belonging to Borland. Clearly, this evidence, if believed, proved the necklace was in Borland's possession when appellant took it and that appellant took the necklace against Borland's will. Appellant's conduct was inconsistent with a claim of right. Appellant fled from the police both in a car and on foot just after the incident.
Flight following the commission of a crime is evidence of guilt . . . .
In addition, the police recovered a gun from the path of the pursuit, and Rockwood stated that the gun had the appearance of the weapon he saw appellant point at Borland. The trial judge believed the testimony of the Commonwealth's witnesses. The credibility of the witnesses and the weight accorded the evidence are matters solely for the fact finder who has the opportunity to see and hear that evidence as it is presented. 20 Va. App. The testimony of the Commonwealth's witnesses was competent and was not inherently incredible.