Michael Jackson: The Verdict: A documentary that tells us nothing new

In the history of journalistic documentaries, there is a question worth asking before evaluating any production that approaches an already extensively documented case: whether adding more fuel to the fire actually makes sense or not. Not so much in the moralistic sense of the term – which should still be considered when dealing with thorny situations – but also in the more practical and formal sense: is there anything new to say?

A question that director Nick Green likely didn't ask himself, as in the three episodes – totaling about as many hours – of Michael Jackson: The Verdict, he takes us back to those weeks that characterized the controversial trial of the King of Pop, accused of pedophilia and then acquitted in a judicial chapter that in 2005 kept the United States, and beyond, on tenterhooks. Released on the Netflix catalog in conjunction with the theatrical presence of the biopic Michael (2026), which is enjoying such success, the series offers little that is truly original to justify its existence.

A Dive into Michael Jackson's Past

The trial is reconstructed through interviews with lawyers, journalists, jurors, and witnesses. The structure is the now classic one of its subgenre, executed with technical competence but without particular inspiration. The editing alternates numerous vintage footage with brand-new interview material at an established pace, trying to dole out alleged plot twists on a story about which everything and more has already been said.

The reconstruction of the hearings through the direct testimony of those who were in the courtroom – cameras were excluded from the court, and this absence of images had already made the work of any documentarian necessarily incomplete – is carried out with clarity, but from a "narrative" point of view, Michael Jackson: The Verdict offers no shocking revelations or unprecedented perspectives capable of changing what was already known. And it will hardly change the percentages between those who believe him innocent and those who believe him guilty, because it advocates both causes without bringing significant turning points.

Everything as Before

And precisely this stubborn pursuit of equidistance between positions demonstrates the desire to take few risks, ending up delving into the murky – sometimes wallowing in it with excessive and morbid complacency – without having the courage to express an idea. The series has nothing overtly wrong with it but ultimately proves superfluous, more a result of the desire to ride the media wave than to be a bearer of new truths.

At times, Michael Jackson: The Verdict shows glimpses of what it could have been with greater awareness, emphasizing not so much what MJ did or didn't do but how the entire entourage that revolved around him – managers, lawyers, bodyguards, housekeepers, or even just fans – functioned for years as a kind of shield/filter between his conduct and its consequences. And that certain oddities he himself admitted, such as sleeping with children, were tolerated or silenced by those who often shared his daily life.

More than about the man himself, it becomes a question about the system and society, with money and power that can influence – in both directions – certain logics and the drastic polarization into two currents of thought, between those who, in believing in absolute innocence, still failed to notice evidently ambiguous behaviors, and those who had already found someone to put on trial, even despite various contradictions. A world in halves, of black and white, which also characterizes this indecisive documentary.