The Truth Machine

by James L. Halperin

  Therefore David made sure Pete and his files and archives were accessible to journalists and writers such as my owner, Tom Mosely (and therefore to me). Pete would voluntarily answer every question put to him by reputable journalists, and would answer them with scip confirmation. David also asked Maya, and many of Pete’s friends and colleagues, to undergo scips while talking freely to the press, disclosing all aspects of Pete’s life, personality, and character, both positive and negative.

  When David spoke with Tilly about it the next day, she was incredulous. “Are you sure you want me to tell the press everything I know about him?”

  “Everything they ask you about. The more candid, the better. If you refuse to answer, they’ll assume we’re hiding something. The truth will never be as bad as what those guys’ll suspect if you don’t level with them.”

  “Especially since positive stories don’t sell as well as negative ones.”

  “Fortunately they all have to pass their scips before their articles can be disseminated,” he reminded her. “As long as they write truthfully, his faults’ll just make him seem more human.”

  (Note: The press was much less reliable prior to the ACIP. Historians indicate journalists were often encouraged to incite sensationalism rather than simply report facts, and many were careless for other reasons as well. All forms of carelessness and dishonesty have sharply diminished during the Truth Machine era.—22g CP)

  David’s primary objective was for the world to finally see the previously enigmatic Pete Armstrong as flesh and blood.

  But David’s strategy had another important goal: to minimize the damage to the ACIP’s credibility. The day the confession was made public, there had been a worldwide financial panic, albeit a temporary one. Without a trustworthy ACIP, there could be economic collapse and possibly even war; the World Stock Market Index fell 17 percent in less than an hour. Fortunately Pete’s detailed confession was quickly released to the media. The market solidified and regained over 70 percent of its losses the same day.

  Pete’s continuing openness further increased worldwide confidence in the system. Within a week of his confession, it was apparent that the Truth Machine remained credible. On September 23, 2049, the WSMI achieved record levels.

  CHAPTER 46

  THE TRIAL

  Austin, Texas

  July 1, 2050—The murder trial of Randall Petersen Armstrong begins in Austin, Texas. It will be the most closely followed news event in history. Lead defense attorney David West predicts that Armstrong will be cleared of capital murder, but most experts are far less sanguine.—ATI formally turns over 5.3 percent of its stock under the terms of its government-mediated financial settlement with the Renaissance Corporation. Armstrong, ATI’s chairman and controlling shareholder, admitted he had clandestinely incorporated Renaissance’s algorithms into the ACIP 26 years ago. In exchange for mutual releases, Renaissance’s shareholders of record at the time of the crime will receive ATI stock, based on their proportion of ownership: 4.1 percent of all outstanding shares from Armstrong directly and 1.2 percent from the company. This stock is valued at $5.61 trillion, making it the largest legal settlement in history. Negotiations took place between the general counsels of each firm; both sides express satisfaction with the amount and with the fact that the settlement was accomplished amicably and without outside attorneys.—A worldwide poll suggests people are almost equally divided regarding Armstrong’s punishment. Approximately 48 percent believe the death penalty appropriate in his case, although most of those polled seem to be angrier at having been deceived than at Charles Scoggins’s murder. The crisis of confidence in the ACIP that occurred after his confession has abated, since there is no evidence that anyone other than Armstrong can fool the machine.

  The preparation of his case had been complete for almost a month. But over the previous several days, trying to do some last-minute work on the computer models before leaving for Austin, Pete had accomplished very little. His concentration was weak.

  It was the eve of his greatest peril, yet ironically, for the first time in decades, he felt he had something worth living for, something that made his life more valuable to him than his place in history. He no longer cared how the world would remember him. He wanted to survive for the sake of his wife and his sons, and his most painful doubts centered around them. Would they as a family be able to adjust to his death? Would Maya remarry? Would her new husband love his adopted sons as his own? Would his sons remember anything about him? How would Pete have turned out had he grown up without his own father, a gentle loving man who’d never so much as raised his voice to him? And would his latest work give his family the priceless gift of immortality, or would his efforts fail?

  He sat next to David at the defense table with Maya and Diana directly behind them, his every move beamed to billions of spectators. He knew that almost everyone in the world was watching, transfixed by the holographic screens at home or at their offices, by the two-dimensional screens on their wristbands, surrounded by 3-D screens in their automobiles and gyrocopters, or seated with friends in virtual reality cafés everywhere on earth. He felt like a caged animal in a zoo or a fish in a giant aquarium.

  He considered his situation. It was unlikely he would be alive 13 months from now. If his life were somehow spared, he would probably never leave prison. Less likely still was the chance that he could ever be a real father to his sons, or watch them grow to adulthood. Although 25 years had seemed such a long time when he reprogrammed the ACIP, in retrospect it seemed like yesterday. Had he not allowed his mistakes to mushroom out of control, he felt his life would now be everything he’d ever wanted it to be. Instead all would be taken away in 13 months and he had nobody to blame but himself.

  The press reported every development minute-by-minute and editorialized ad nauseum. Only Jennifer Finley’s media empire refused to publish editorials about the case. When Reginald Zuk, a reporter from Turbonews, asked her why, the 63-year-old magnate answered, “Because it wouldn’t be fair to my subscribers. Even with scips, I could never expect editors and journalists working for me to write objectively about a man I once loved.”

  Zuk pressed Jennifer. “But what do you think of Pete Armstrong?”

  “I knew him in 2024, when the crimes took place. He was a good man then, and I’m sure he still is. I hope the verdict is ‘innocent.’”

  Over the past six months, there had been over 400 biographies of Pete Armstrong published in every format, and thousands of works concerning ATI, the ACIP, and aspects of his life, crimes, and legal travails. Many became bestsellers. David’s strategy of openness seemed to be working. When Pete’s confession had first become public knowledge, over 80 percent of those polled were in favor of condemning him to death. As the trial began, that number had fallen below 50 percent.

  First Circuit Judge Curtis Lezar called the session to order. The baby-faced, dark-haired Lezar, who had never taken growth hormones, was rather short in stature (5 feet, 10 inches), although not quite short enough to require a specially built dais.

  The computerized selection of this presiding judge for the trial had come as a surprise to most pundits. At 44, Lezar had limited experience in high profile cases. He had spent his entire working life in government service; only 15 months earlier he’d served as presiding judge over Texas Small Claims Court, which exclusively handles civil disputes under $500,000. Prior to that he had risen through the ranks of the World Justice Department after it absorbed the United States Department of Justice, which he’d joined, fresh out of law school, as a legal clerk assigned to the Texas Supreme Court.

  His poise was impressive, considering that the defendant was the wealthiest and now the most famous person on the planet. The opposing attorneys were the current Texas Attorney General and a former Texas Attorney General who had served two terms as President of the United States. Witnesses included some of the most renowned and accomplished individuals in the fields of science, business, medicine, and law. The trial was expe
cted to last two days, the longest single-defendant trial in the United States since 2027. Pressure on Lezar would be intense, his every decision, indeed his every gesture scrutinized by thousands of journalists and experts.

  Over the preceding six months, in anticipation of his role in the Armstrong case, Lezar had become the most famous jurist in the world. He wasn’t certain he liked the attention.

  The mood in the courtroom was somber, the tension pervasive.

  Lezar addressed David gravely. “President West, what are your client’s responses to the charges of murder, perjury, obstruction of justice, and fraud?”

  “We plead not guilty to murder on the basis of self-defense. If he is found guilty, we request amnesty on the basis of extenuating circumstances. We plead guilty to perjury, obstruction of justice, and fraud, but request amnesty on the basis of extenuating circumstances.”

  Lezar spoke to the jury, three women and two men seated to his left. “The defense has already admitted to the crimes of perjury, obstruction of justice, and fraud, and has stipulated that the defendant did kill Charles Scoggins. Ladies and gentlemen, your role in this trial is strictly to decide, on the basis of the evidence, whether the murder was committed in self-defense according to the definition of law. You’ll hear testimony from nearly a dozen witnesses. Each witness will be questioned once by each side. There will be no redirect questions, but the opposing attorneys may cite in their summations any scip depositions they have previously conducted with witnesses. You may also make a recommendation for or against amnesty, which is not in my power to grant. Amnesty can only be granted by the World Tribunal. Any appeal filed after the verdict will be heard by that court.”

  Lezar turned to David. “Is the defense prepared for trial?”

  “We are, Judge.”

  “Mr. Shaw, are you ready to give the opening statement for the World Government’s case?”

  “I am, sir.”

  “Please begin.”

  “Thank you, sir. Fellow officers of the court, on March 1, 2024, Randall Petersen Armstrong, unable to perfect his ACIP in conformance with the terms of the Truth Machine Bill, inserted several hundred lines of computer code, the essence of which he knew had been obtained illegally from a competing firm. Then he reprogrammed the ACIP so that he could circumvent it at will. On August 6 of that same year, Mr. Armstrong swore, under oath, that he was unaware of any imperfections in the technology of the ACIP or of any violations of the law pursuant to the ACIP’s development. He knew that he was committing perjury. Five days later on August 11, Mr. Armstrong forced Charles Scoggins at gunpoint to handcuff himself to a chair, and while Mr. Scoggins was immobilized and helpless to defend himself, Mr. Armstrong murdered him in cold blood. Subsequently Mr. Armstrong disposed of the body and lied to law enforcement officials about his involvement in Mr. Scoggins’s disappearance.”

  Shaw paused impressively, then continued. “The prosecution will not present any evidence of these assertions, since Mr. Armstrong himself has agreed to stipulate that every one of them is true.

  “We believe the claim of self-defense is absurd. Since that’s the only issue of this trial, we intend to call no witnesses of our own. We’ll disprove any declarations of self-defense through cross-examination of the defense’s own witnesses.

  “The World Government doesn’t deny that Mr. Armstrong has made significant, positive contributions to the human race. He may be a good person. None of that matters in the eyes of the law. There’s no legal justification for murder other than self-defense. The law is clear on that and the law was soundly conceived. No civilization can survive without enforcing its laws. Regardless of any extenuating circumstances, for the good of our society, Mr. Armstrong must pay for his crimes with his life.”

  He sat down.

  Lezar turned to David. “Is the defense ready to present its opening statement?”

  “We are, Judge.”

  Lezar signaled David to begin.

  “Fellow citizens of the World, at this moment in human history, 25 years is a very long time. Try to think back. Remember what our world was like when the crimes occurred. Liars were usually believed and rewarded, the truthful often doubted and punished. There was far less benefit to be gained from honesty than there is today, and as human beings, we’re genetically programmed to seek that which we perceive is to our advantage. Evil and deception lurked in the darkest corners of every human mind—although in some more than others.” Smiling wryly, David paused as laughter erupted, then continued, “Crime and war flourished. The world was a very different place.

  “Now take a few moments to consider Pete Armstrong’s influence on our world. He took one man’s life, an evil man who has not been missed. But Pete’s inventions have saved millions of lives, possibly the entire human race. Had he not used the illegally obtained code, the ACIP might have been further delayed at great cost to humanity.

  “Repentant for his crimes, today Pete is a model citizen in all respects. He’s no threat to anyone and his brain is nothing less than a world treasure. I don’t see how our society can afford to relinquish such an asset lightly.

  “I have known Pete Armstrong for most of my life. I’ve never met any person who’s more honorable, more compassionate, and more selfless.

  “I also knew Charles Scoggins fairly well. Mr. Scoggins was not a benevolent man. He was in fact a clever and hardened criminal with no conscience. Scoggins would have tried to murder Pete Armstrong if Pete hadn’t killed him first. What’s more relevant is what Pete himself believed on that terrible day over 25 years ago when he pulled the trigger. Self-defense as a point of law is based on the awareness and intent of the defendant at the moment of the assault. Pete’s mental state was not that of a murderer. Indeed, he was groping for a way to avoid killing Charles Scoggins without jeopardizing his own life and the lives of others.

  “Long ago, with altruistic motives, Pete Armstrong made a series of terrible mistakes, every one because he was trying to help humanity. He was forced into those mistakes by the purposeful ruse of an evil man. Charles Scoggins delayed the ACIP by at least two years, just to cover his own crimes and to trick Pete into a position where he could be blackmailed.

  “Without Charles Scoggins, Pete Armstrong could have lived a thousand years without ever committing an illegal act. He does not deserve execution.”

  Lezar pondered David’s words for a moment. “The defense may call its first witness.”

  “We call Marjorie Ann Tilly.”

  Tilly, handsome and energetic at 82, had retired from ATI the previous December. She was duly sworn in and seated. After several minutes of background questions, David asked her about the defendant.

  “Ms. Tilly, how long have you known Pete Armstrong?”

  “Over 55 years.”

  “And how long had you known Mr. Scoggins before his disappearance?”

  “I worked with him for about 24 years.”

  “How familiar are you with the inner workings of the ACIP?”

  “I know the ACIP as well as anyone, except Pete.”

  “Ms. Tilly, in your opinion, could ATI have completed the ACIP without using the illegally obtained Renaissance code?”

  “Based on what I know today, if Scoggins hadn’t obstructed the team, we could have designed the same program ourselves in six months or less.”

  The CyCare Truth Machine that had been specially installed for this trial continued to register solid green.

  “Thank you. I have no more questions.”

  Lezar turned to Shaw. “Does the prosecution wish to cross-examine?”

  “Thank you, sir. Ms. Tilly, when did you first become aware that Mr. Armstrong had reprogrammed the ACIP so he could override it?”

  “September 6th of last year.”

  “How did you learn that fact?”

  “Pete told me himself.”

  “Mr. Armstrong reprogrammed the ACIP on March 1, 2024, and you had no idea until last September?”

  “I never had
any reason to suspect it. If I’d been suspicious, I probably could have figured it out.”

  “And yet you claim to know more about the ACIP’s inner workings than any person other than Armstrong. Is that correct?”

  “Not necessarily more. At least as much.”

  “You admit you never realized, over a period of 25 years, that Armstrong knew how to override the ACIP. How can you expect us to accept your analysis that the team could have duplicated the stolen Renaissance code in less than six months?”

  Tilly was unprepared for this line of questioning. “I was asked for my opinion and I gave it. My opinion’s based on experience and on facts I’ve accumulated over many years. I stand by that opinion. I know my business.”

  “You know your business, yet the ACIP software remained tainted for 25 years on your watch.”

  “I object,” David shouted.

  “I’ll withdraw it,” Shaw answered, turning to Lezar. “Sir, I have no more questions for this witness.”

  Lezar asked Tilly to step down.

  The defense called Dr. Alphonso Carter. Carter was 91 and Pete thought he looked wonderful. Carter had undergone pancreas, thyroid, and liver clonings 12 years earlier, and received the gland and organ transplants three years later. The transplants had taken well, and Carter felt 30 years younger. He walked 5 to 10 miles every day and was projected to have at least 16 years left before requiring cryonic suspension.

  David set the tone by qualifying Carter as an expert in both criminal law and criminal psychology and asking about his experiences with ATI and with Pete. Then the real questioning began.

  “Dr. Carter, as a world-renowned criminologist, you’re intimately familiar with the effects of the ACIP on society, are you not?”

  “Absolutely. I have conducted and published formal demographic studies.”