When is a conspiracy not a conspiracy

I usually try and avoid commenting on international politics, as to be honest I don;t fully understand it. But the issuing of the Scotland Yard report into the assassination of Benazhir Bhutto has got me confused.

Basically Mrs Bhutto was shot, and the assassin then blew himself up. The official verdict reads the assassin tried to shoot her, and then blew himself killing her with the blast of his bomb. The thing is Mrs Bhutto's supporters claim that the official version shows a government conspiracy. How do they come up with that wild theory? At the end of the day you have an assassin shooting a gun, and then blowing himself up. Something the both sides agree on, so how does this persons success, or failure to land a shot on Mrs Bhutto constitute a goverment conspiracy.

I really don't understand how the conspiracy theory has come about, its not as though there is a claim for any magic bullets like the JFK assassination. Now, I know there is a lot of animosity in Pakistan between political sides, but a conspiracy? a cover up? I'm confused. The same man, shot at and blew himself up, with the result that he wanted. Neither side are disputing those facts.

Now you know why I try and stay out of international stuff.