I’d be the last person to defend Michael Jackson (or his music). But he went free because those who testified against him had serious credibility problems that the prosecutor couldn’t overcome.
Jackson has plenty of credibility issues of his own, which is more than enough to convict him at the office watercooler. But in American courtrooms, the onus is on the prosecution to remove any reasonable doubt from the minds of the jurors. When both sides have credibility issues, as they did in this case, the presumption of innocence goes to the accused and he moon-walks free.
The case was not tried very well by the prosecutor. I mean, what was the deal with the conspiracy charge? As far as I know, this charge was essentially ignored by the DA. They presented no evidence to support conspiracy. Yet Jackson was charged with it. This only bolsters the defense’s case, because if they can bring doubt into the mind of the jury on one charge, then all may be suspect.
I’m not saying it’s fair. Or that Jackson “didn’t do it”. Only that this is the way our system works. It’s biased in favor of the defendant. By design.