substance", which was described as being capable of causing a large explosion, possibly even a nuclear reaction. Yet it emerged that even the police weren't sure red mercury actually existed. Even so, the prosecution insisted this was irrelevant, arguing that what really mattered was whether the defendants believed they had something that could be used by terrorists.
The argument did not convince the jury, who acquitted the men on all charges. But the real significance of the case lies in the reluctance of the Crown to clearly state the truth: that red mercury is a myth. In 1998, scientists from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, America's nuclear weapons security centre, went public with research showing that red mercury was the subject of scams dating back decades, and had all the terrorist potential of a dental filling.
Yet to judge by the official obfuscation over red mercury at this trial, there are some who think it should not be robbed of its power to scare the public. 
FIRST POSTED JULY 25, 2006
