Of course I have no real idea, but my guess is that the jurors got it right; otherwise a large percentage of the teaching staff at most British public schools would have been locked away years ago.
Being fumbled and manipulated by a greasy, creepy, unattractive and yet powerful person, who most likely does have some ability to make you feel quite confused as regards the truth, is indeed horrible and sickening. It can have subtle long-termish effects, but in the scheme of all the awful things that happen to children, it is but a part of an overall picture of adult error that if we were to involve the law, would mean that all adults in contact with children would, at some point, need to be put away. Which is worse, afterall, being touched up by a teacher, or being compelled to go to the excruciatingly boring, appallingly coercive, hideously ugly, unnecessarily exhausting, crushingly oppressive institution that is school?
There is in an order of magnitude of difference between these types of adult interference and those who sexually abuse children in a deeply devastating way and there needs to be great clarity on the difference between these situations. I rather suspect that it looks as if the jurors in the Jackson trial were capable of making this distinction.
Next thing: reduce coercion of children in all it's forms, hopefully through education rather than the use of the law.