A woman accused of killing a peacock with a baseball bat last year in Mäkaha appeared in court yesterday to ask for dismissal of the animal-cruelty charge against her.

Sandra Maloney's attorney argued that the statute used to charge her is vague and does not apply to peafowl.

The lawyer, Randall Oyama, also cited testimony from a zoo expert who said that the method used by Maloney to kill the bird was "humane."

Oyama said James Maloney, the defendant's husband, had earlier contacted the state Department of Land and Natural Resources to inquire if a permit was required to kill peafowl, which roam free in Mäkaha Valley and have been a source of noise complaints by residents there.

Maloney was told no permit was required, Oyama said, adding that "is tantamount to consent."

Oyama said peafowl fall under a classification of animals which are "nuisances, pests or vermin" which can be killed without a license.

The birds "squawk very loudly at all hours" causing "sleep deprivation" to residents, the lawyer said. "They are detrimental to human life," he said.

Deputy Prosecutor Steve Bumanglag argued to Wilson that peafowl are not legally classified as pests and that the animal-cruelty statute does apply to them.

Circuit Judge Michael Wilson took the issue under advisement and said he will rule later.