DREW CAUGHT ON FILM?

DREW PETERSON SAYS STATE POLICE ARE USING CAMERAS ON HIS NEIGHBOR'S HOME TO WATCH HIM.

BOLINGBROOK -- Drew Peterson feels like someone's watching him, and he doesn't like it one bit.

Peterson discovered his next-door neighbor, Sharon Bychowski, has surveillance cameras mounted on her home, cameras he claims are trained on his front yard and on his backyard swimming pool.

"I think Sharon wants to see me naked," Peterson said. He then laughed.

Peterson's attorney, Joel Brodsky, did not find the matter quite as amusing.

"How would you feel if the state police had video surveillance of your front yard?" Brodsky said, accusing the cops of putting the cameras on Bychowski's house. State police did not return calls for comment, but Bychowski says the cameras are all hers.

"No. They're mine," she said. "Tell (Brodsky) I said, 'Bite me.'"

Bychowski said she installed the cameras out of fear of Peterson after he got a hold of a remote opener for her garage door in March.

"Since he felt the need to open my garage door, I need to protect myself," she said.

Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy, has been missing since October. State police have called her case a "potential homicide" and named Peterson their sole suspect.

State police also are revisiting the mysterious March 2004 apparent bathtub drowning of Peterson's third wife, Kathleen Savio. After considering Savio's death an accident for more than three years, authorities did an abrupt about face and declared it was a homicide in the wake of Stacy's disappearance.

Peterson believes the police are watching him, just as they have been watching Plainfield's Craig Stebic, whose wife, Lisa, has been missing six months longer than Stacy.

"I hear the state police have them on Stebic's house," he said. "Why should I be any different?"

Plainfield Police Chief Donald Bennett said last summer that the surveillance camera was installed on a light pole near Stebic's home as part of a village-wide enforcement project based on neighborhood concern about criminal activity.

Brodsky does not believe Bychowski.

"I really don't," he said. "Maybe she doesn't want Drew to know the state police are watching him."

Regardless of whether the cops or Bychowski put the cameras up, Brodsky is intent on having them turned away from his client's home. If it is the police, he questioned the constitutionality of surveilling Peterson. If the cameras do indeed belong to Bychowski, he said, then his client is the victim of a "clear-cut invasion of privacy."

"The first thing we have to do is figure out who's doing it. I'm not taking (Bychowski's) word for it," Brodsky said. "If it turns out it is her, I'll take action. I promise you."