Since everyone else is offering up their opinion, I'll give mine too. I think the guy is innocent (of the kiddie thing, not of producing bad music, which itself should be punishable to an equal extent). I arrived at this using the same reasoning as in the chili case. Which situation is the most likely? Being successful in this country makes you a target for fraudulent lawsuits, whether you're in the entertainment industry, foodservice (Dave Thomas is smiling in his grave right now), or whatever. It's the curse of achieving more than those around you, and the greedy and jealous invent scandal in hopes of a free ride.
This wasn't the first time Jackson was sued for child molestation, and I can't imagine it will be the last. But if someone is going to give it another whirl, they had better come forth with something resembling credible evidence. The only evidence the prosecution had during this trial was that he looked weird. Not exactly a criminal offense.
Regardless, if I were him, and was just exonerated from a crime that I didn't commit, I would place myself as far away as possible from any future risks of indictment. No more persons under the age of 21 allowed in Neverland ranch, background check for a history of lawsuits, and release forms signed in triplicate before you pass thru the turnstile.
Obligatory Joke: Why was Michael Jackson spotted at K-Mart? He heard boys' pants were half-off!