Free speech, exercised both individually and through a free press, is a necessity in any country where people are themselves free.

For far too long legal systems around the world have been bogged down with paperwork and politics. Criminals found 'not guilty' are set free, even though they are not innocent. Innocent people are found guilty and punished accordingly, even though they were not responsible for the crime laid upon them. It is these tenants that force a group of scientists and engineers to create a lie-detection system so strong and so foolproof that it becomes the ultimate in deciding guilt or innocence.

Picture in your mind a chamber, much like a courthouse, with a judge's bench, only there is no jury box. It is not necessary. Instead, there resides the Chair. Resembling a grand throne, only dark in color and with many wires attached to it, it is far from regal indeed. Two, large lights hover above the throne. While not in use the lights are dim, but in use they simply show one of two colors. Red, or green.

Now picture in your mind a trial in session in this room, and the defendant is hooked up to this chair. Prosecution lawyers have their list of approved questions, and the defense attorney's only job is to agree on said questions to be asked, and to make sure that the defendant is treated properly. This particular case involves the murder of a six year old girl, and the man in the chair is accused of the crime. A murder trial, in the real world, would last how long? Weeks? Months? Perhaps years? How much would the trial cost taxpayers? This does not include appeals or suspensions or even mistrials.

This particular trial takes 10 minutes. That's it.

The judge comes in, everyone rises, the bailiff reads the procedures, and the prosecution lawyer begins. To verify that the Chair is working fine, they ask the defendant (Mr. Smith) a series of mundane questions to verify the results. Are you Mr. Smith? Where were you born? What is your middle name? Questions to that effect. To each response a green light glows above his head, indicating truth. After two minutes of this, the dance is over, and the real questions begin.

"Mr. Smith, did you murder (insert victim's name here)". Mr. Smith shifts uncomfortably, visibly sweating, and answers

"No I did not." Red light appears above his head. Red, menacing, and glaring. The crowd in the courtroom murmurs amongst its self. The defense sighs and the prosecution continues.

"Mr. Smith, do you recognize this?" (Shows Mr. Smith a picture of the murder weapon.)

"No I do not." Red light flashes again.

Now, the cynic in us would immediately doubt the accuracy of such a machine. A machine that could detect a lie or truth within humans so accurately, that it would become an official part of the legal proceedings. Lawyers of the defense variety would be fighting each other to keep the Chair from ever, ever being used.

But remember, this is a hypothetical world, a world where the Chair's accuracy was tested and questioned and tested again for years, and never, ever failed a test. Not once. It's usefulness proven beyond a doubt, that its use in the courts now is no longer questioned.

Also keep in mind the flip side of having such a tool. Flash back to Mr. Smith, sitting in the chair, but different circumstances.

"Mr. Smith, did you murder this girl?"

"No I did not." Green light flashes above Mr. Smith's head, and his defense nods knowingly, while the prosecution scratches its head and wonders what its next move will be. The prosecution pauses, and then asks Mr. Smith another question.

"Do you know who did murder her?" The smug smile fades from Mr. Smith's face quickly, and suddenly he is sweating. The defense objects, because that question was not approved, but the damage is already done.

So you see, dear reader, the power of such a machine if used in a courthouse. How much time, how much money, how many lives could be spared by such a gift? Imagine historical moments re-written by such a machine.

"Mr. Simpson, did you murder Nicole Simpson and/or Ron Brown?"

"Mr. Oswald, did you shoot President Kennedy, and if so, did you work alone?"

"Mr. Hussein, do you have weapons of mass destruction?"

Now we all know that a machine does not exist. Variations of it does, but they are not nearly the answer that the Chair represents. We are years, perhaps decades or centuries, from obtaining such an invention. Perhaps it is within our own human nature to never have such an invention exist.

Therein lays the rub. Would humanity accept and assimilate into the very fabric of their society a machine that robs us of what we do best? The truth, as an ideal, is a great concept, but we all know that we are far from obtaining it. Whether lying to others or lying to ourselves, humanity is based upon lies, or half-truths, or distorted facts. Could such a machine truly exist in our world? Sadly, I would submit that it probably could not. Humanity has the capacity for many things, but being able to accept the honest truth is a concept that we cannot accept.