Was Michael Jackson Convicted? The 2005 Trial Verdict
Last reviewed: June 2026
This page explains what Jackson was charged with, how the trial unfolded, what the jury decided and why, and how to distinguish a criminal verdict from later civil claims. We report only what the courts established.
What was Michael Jackson charged with?
The 2005 prosecution in Santa Barbara County, California, accused Jackson of offences relating to a 13-year-old boy, Gavin Arvizo, at his Neverland Ranch estate. The indictment included counts of child molestation, administering an intoxicant to a minor, and conspiracy. Jackson denied all of the allegations and pleaded not guilty.
The trial and the verdict
The trial began on 28 February 2005 and ran for about 14 weeks, attracting enormous worldwide media coverage. The prosecution and defence presented competing accounts, and the jury deliberated for roughly 32 hours. On 13 June 2005 the jury returned not-guilty verdicts on all counts. Jurors later indicated that they did not find the evidence sufficient to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt — the standard required for a criminal conviction.
| Detail | Fact |
|---|---|
| Court | Santa Barbara County, California |
| Trial start | 28 February 2005 |
| Verdict date | 13 June 2005 |
| Outcome | Not guilty on all counts |
| Conviction? | No |
- “He was found guilty / went to prison.” No. He was acquitted on every count and never imprisoned.
- “A 1993 case proved the allegations.” An earlier 1993 allegation was settled in a civil agreement and did not result in a criminal conviction; settlements are not findings of guilt.
- “Civil lawsuits since his death mean he was convicted.” Civil cases use a lower standard of proof and are separate from the 2005 criminal verdict, which remains an acquittal.
Acquittal vs. proven innocence
In criminal law, “not guilty” means the prosecution did not prove the case to the required standard — beyond reasonable doubt. It is a legal acquittal. Debate about the allegations has continued in documentaries and civil litigation in the years since, but none of that changes the criminal record: Jackson was acquitted in 2005 and was never convicted of these offences. It is accurate to say he was found not guilty; it would be inaccurate to call him a convicted offender.
What about the 1993 allegations?
Separately, in 1993 Jackson faced an allegation that was resolved through a civil settlement. No criminal charges were brought to trial in that instance. A civil settlement is a financial resolution and is not the same as a criminal conviction or an admission of guilt.
Why this question still gets asked
Two decades on, “was Michael Jackson convicted?” remains one of the most-searched questions about him, partly because allegations have resurfaced through documentaries and posthumous civil litigation. It is worth separating three different things: the criminal trial (which ended in acquittal), the 1993 civil settlement (a financial agreement, not a conviction), and later civil claims brought after his 2009 death (which use a lower standard of proof and are not criminal findings). Only the criminal trial can produce a criminal conviction, and in that trial the jury acquitted him on every count.
How a US jury trial reaches a verdict
In a US criminal trial, the prosecution must persuade all jurors that the defendant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. If even one juror is not satisfied, there can be no guilty verdict on that count. In Jackson’s case the jury unanimously returned not-guilty verdicts on all counts after weighing months of testimony. That is the highest bar in the legal system, and it was not met — which is why, as a matter of record, he stands acquitted rather than convicted.
Frequently asked questions
Was Michael Jackson ever convicted of a crime?
No. He was acquitted on all counts in his 2005 trial and had no criminal conviction in that case.
What was the verdict?
Not guilty on every charge, delivered on 13 June 2005.
Did he go to prison?
No. Because he was acquitted, he was not sentenced or imprisoned.
What standard of proof applied?
The criminal standard — beyond reasonable doubt — which the jury found was not met.
Sources: Trial of Michael Jackson (Wikipedia); The Washington Post.
