The Defense rested in the Michael Jackson case. Let's see who should win.
The prosecution theory is that Michael Jackson is a homosexual pedophile. He maintains his Neverland ranch as a lure to attract young boys whom he then exploits to gratify himself sexually. To aid his seductions, he gives the boys pornography and alcohol. To keep his secret, he maintains a tight control over everyone around him.
The defense theory is that Michael Jackson sees himself as Peter Pan, the boy who never grew up. That's why he named his ranch Neverland. He surrounds himself with boys so that he can pretend to be one himself. The activities they engaged in were those you would expect to find at a summer camp, including crowded showers and sleeping quarters. He also played everyone's favorite uncle: helping them get into mischief by getting wine and porn for them.
So, which side is right? We should ask which theory is a better fit for the evidence. If the prosecution theory is true, then we would expect many cases of sexual exploitation to be reported. Jackson would have an uncontrollable sexual appetite and would be surrounded with limitless opportunities.
If the defense theory is true, then we would expect to see only occasional cases reported, and those would be motivated by money. The evidence clearly fits the defense theory.
A rebuttal to this argument is that Jackson could be very discreet: he would carefully avoid giving any appearance of impropriety. But this is the man who dangled his child over a fourth story balcony in front of hundreds of spectators and several photographers. He is not known for discretion.
As I see it, the prosecution not only failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, they didn't even meet the test of preponderance of evidence. They barely made probable cause.