On 13 December 2011, there were explosions and gunshots in the city of Liege,  Belgium. The initial assumption of people in the area was that two or more men were involved in the attack, but the official explanation claims that only one man of Moroccan descent was responsible.

Assume criminals are at crime scenes before and after

You should assume that criminals are at the scene of their crime before the crime occurs in order to prepare for it, and you should assume that criminals are all around the area after the crime occurs to do any follow-up work, such as providing eyewitness testimony, and to ensure that there is no evidence that will expose their crime.

• Be suspicious of witnesses

As with the 9/11 attack and other mysterious events, (such as the collapse of a bridge in Minnesota in 2007), the news reporters find a few witnesses to explain what happened. Once you realize that the news reporters are criminals, you should realize that you must be suspicious of the witnesses. 

• Don't trust "victims"

Some criminals are injured or killed during their crime, and some fake trivial injuries in order to fool us into assuming that they are innocent, and some criminals claim that an existing injury is actually from the crime. Don't trust a victim of a crime, even if he has an injury.

• Don't trust curious citizens in the background

Some of the people who are "in the background" at a crime are also criminals who are trying to ensure that everybody is following the script, and that there are no bits of evidence to expose the crime. The attack in Belgium provides some amusing images to explain this concept.

	The reporters at Russia Today, which is a much more biased organization than CBS, the BBC, or CNN, interviewed some people in Belgium. Notice that while they are talking to one man, there are two men in the background. All of the photos come from the interviews at this link.
	One of the men is trying to hide his face. Who are these two men? Why is one of them trying to hide? Who is he hiding from? If he doesn't want to be on television, why doesn't he walk away from the area?
	Eventually one of those two men steps forward to add some information.
	If those two men in the background did not want to be on television, why did one of them step forward to talk to the reporter? Why did he suddenly feel a need to interrupt the interview to add some information?
	In this photo, a young, male Neanderthal walked over to observe the interview with this (nervous?) witness.  Is he simply a curious Neanderthal? Or would he have interrupted the interview if he didn't consider the witness to be doing a proper job?

Be careful and observant at crime scenes

If you find yourself in an area in which a mysterious crime has just occurred, you should immediately assume that you are mingling among criminals. Some of the journalists are criminals, and some of the witnesses are criminals, and some of the policemen, FBI agents, and other government officials may also be criminals.

You must be careful of who you trust when you are at the scene of a crime. You should also observe the people around you. You might be able to identify some of the criminals, or some of their techniques, or figure out what actually happened.