Nuclear & Social Fallout: After Bhutto's Killing, a Shell-Shocked Pakistan Explodes in Riots & Ethnic Tensions

As Pakistan's government gives conflicting stories of the cause of death for assassinated former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, and refuses outside investigatory help, Pakistan is exploding from within. Accusations of a coverup have now been joined with a flaring of ethnic tensions in this nuclear power nation.

Although the government is trying to pass off Bhutto's death as accidental while a shooter and a suicide bomber attacked her, people around the world aren't buying their story. In saying that Bhutto injured herself by falling down during the attack and hitting her head, the government is desperately trying to stop the tidal wave of declaring the truth: Bhutto is a martyr for freedom and her people, and she was assassinated in a skillful plot.



Unctously, government spokesmen have been saying how sad it is that Bhutto chose to stand up and wave at her supporters, thus leading to her falling down and causing her fatal injury. This cold, callous attempt to blame the victim while diverting attention from the government's failure to provide the reasonable security she had requested, and also distract attention from a plot, reveals why Bhutto returned home and gave her life to fight the current government.

Nuclear power, and Pakistan's people, are in the hands of duplicitous power-mongers and are at increasing risk from Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and jihadists. After Bhutto's assassination and the government's deceit, Pakistan is likely to slide backwards, thus giving terrorists exactly what they wanted.

A key question remains: why is the current government so quick to play into the terrorists' hands? Instead of shutting down investigations and turning away help, Pakistan's government should be seeking truth in an open way.

Forensics Casebook III: Kathleen Savio, Stacy Peterson, the Chicago Cop & Faking Death by Drowning

As promised in Forensics Casebook II: Kathleen Savio, Stacy Peterson, Dr. Baden, & the Chicago Cop, I'm going to tell you how a homicide can be made to look like a drowning. Given that Savio apparently drowned, battered and bruised, in a dry bathtub, the questions asked in Forensics Casebook II are especially relevant to the mystery of her death.

But first, a PSA (no, not a Public Service Announcement, a Peterson Service Announcement): now that Drew Peterson, the hastily-retired former Bolingbrook police sergeant, has lawyered up, we're all supposed to note a few things. First, Joel A. Brodsky wants it made clear that noted expert Dr. Michael Baden did not identify Peterson as the culprit in any homicide of Kathleen Savio.

In one of the most wasted and uncomfortable interviews in this whole mess, Matt Lauer tackled Brodsky and the snickering Peterson. Brodsky, with Peterson literally jammed up shoulder-to-shoulder and arm-to-arm with him, noted that there is no official linking of Peterson to either Savio's death or the fact that Stacy Peterson, wife #4, missing.

OK, so Peterson's been officially named a suspect in Stacy's disappearance, but there's no linkage between him and the questions about the lives and fates of his wives. There's an entire Peterson laundry list of control factors for the world, announced by his lawyer as Peterson clams up, then tweaked by Peterson when he un-clams.

Like this: Peterson says he's distressed about the effect of media coverage on him. Oh, today's People Magazine shoot? He didn't mean that, obviously. Nor did he think that the People shoot would disrupt his family life. It's so hard, you know, being a media phenomenon: you have to tease 'em with "no," then give 'em a little leg and a little "yes, yes."

But in the middle of all this we find: shattered lives. Back to Baden's autopsy of Kathleen Savio, Peterson's third wife (Stacy, #4, is still missing in case you lost that among all the Drew, Drew, Drew promotions). Funny thing: Baden never said that Peterson did it. He specifically said that "who done it" wasn't part of the responsibility of an autopsy. But apparently Brodsky wanted to make it clear that what Baden didn't say wasn't right.

However, Savio's exhumed body stood as mute witness to her death. Baden, acting for the Savio family, said it was definitely a homicide. Initially, the authorities had ruled it an accident by drowning.

Savio's first autopsy had revealed "moderate edema" of the respiratory system. The head laceration and some bruises were also noted.

There are many good references for forensics. For this, I chose Forensics for Dummies simply because it is accessible to the layperson and forthrightly stated.

Here's they key point: "... If you place a corpse in water, and it remains submerged for a period of time after death, the lungs passively fill with water, and the ME's examination can't distinguish this postmortem fluid in the lungs from liquid that resulted in death."

Savio was in the water long enough to have wrinkled fingers, when found in the dry tub. How long was that? And was the "moderate edema" of the respiratory system caused by water entering the lungs before or after death?

Was Savio unconscious, or even dead, when she was placed in water? There are many things, including inconsistent statements from Peterson and witnesses, that need explaining.

Drew's Clues: Wife #2 Says Peterson Bragged He Could Safely Kill Her

Drew Peterson, who even has Dr. Phil worried, is quite a guy. Peterson hit his second wife, cheated on her (eventually with the woman who became his third, the one who drowned in a dry bathtub), was so controlling that he bugged their house and -- oh yes, told her he could kill her and make it look like an accident.

Funny thing, he said that to wife #3, Kathleen Savio, who wound up dead. He threatened wife #4, Stacy Peterson, with the same thing. Everyone's looking for Stacy, except Peterson, who coldly described her to Matt Lauer as "spoiled".

Where was Drew? Follow the clues; follow the money. Peterson was busy protecting his pension--about $72,000 a year-- while pleading for a free defense attorney, and, in his media work, casting slurs on his third and fourth wives. Peterson proclaimed that he married both of them because they were "beautiful" and "fun," but then later found out that both had serious "emotional problems." (Nothing to do with him, of course, if you believe him.)

According to a solid interview by Chicago Tribune writer Erika Slife, Peterson also bragged about how he could deceive people. In her interview, Slife covers a lot of ground with Vicki Connolly, who says she's still afraid of Peterson.

"... in the first interview granted by one of his ex-wives since Stacy's disappearance, Connolly, 48, said Thursday that during their marriage an increasingly controlling Peterson told her he could kill her and make it look like an accident."

Connolly peels back the covering on Peterson's second marriage. If you think you see patterns, you're right. When he moved on from Connolly, he was already involved with Savio. When he was ready to replace Savio, he was already involved with Stacy, the then 17-year-old teenager who he got pregnant.

Forensics Casebook I: Kathleen Savio, Stacy Peterson, the Chicago Cop & Fox's Greta Van Susteren

It's time to take an analytical look at all the components of the case involving former police Sgt. Drew Peterson, whose third wife mysteriously turned up drowned in a dry bathtub, whose fourth wife is missing, and whose second wife is still afraid of him.

This case has been a poster child for the merging of media and investigation. As a long-time journalist and a former security expert, I've been taking a look at the various elements of the coverage of this compelling story.

Unequivocally, the best, fairest, and most consistent coverage has been provided by Fox News' Greta Van Susteren. Her transparent coverage, including her podcasts and her blog, have been a model of how to incisively and competently conduct journalistic business while maintaining a human approach.

Obviously, there's a lot going on in this case. So we're going to look at it in terms of a broad-based forensics, from physical to psychological to sociological. The commentary will necessarily be graphic in some parts, when the autopsy of Peterson's third wife, Kathleen Savio (who left Peterson a millionaire-plus) is discussed.

We'll also take a look at Peterson's actions, his comments about Stacy Peterson, the missing fourth wife, his body language, and his statements during Matt Lauer's good interview with Peterson on the Today show.

I'll be using the LSI Scan technique, pioneered by international expert Avinoam Sapir. The website describes the technique like this:
"....the most effective technique available for obtaining information and detecting deception from statements of witnesses or suspects."

I was privileged to be included in the LSI Scan basic class, and am now enrolled in the advanced class. Sapir has, indeed, developed a technique for analyzing statements that is crisp, scientific, and wholly reliable.

During the interview with Lauer, Peterson made what I believe to be the most significant statement he has yet made. That single statement sums up the fates of both wives.

Caveat: Neither LSI Scan nor Sapir are involved in my commentary. This is simply my use of the technique.

The Peterson cases, which have brought so many tears to so many, actually revolves around water. Kathleen Savio was determined to have drowned, and her first autopsy noted that her hair was wet (yes, there was blood there too)--and her fingers were wrinkled, according to many reports. If her fingers were wrinkled, then at some point she had been submerged in water--in a dry bathtub.

Now to fourth wife Stacy Peterson,.The first place the cops went looking: a small retention pond near the Peterson home. The second place they went looking? Water again.

How did Savio's fingers get wrinkled? And what led police to start their search for Stacy with water?

We'll have more to say about that. Consider this an exercise in "citizen forensics," as we look at the case of the Chicago Cop and the mysteries surrounding his wives. Are we looking at a modern-day Bluebeard hidden behind a blue uniform?

That's the question, I think, that America is waiting to have answered.