Plato's Tale of Socrates' Apology In Plato's tale of Socrates' Apology, Socrates is put on trial on charges of having corrupted the youth of Athens through his teachings and of do not believe in the gods that the state believed in. Throughout the story, the argument against him comes across as unreliable and biased. Therefore, Socrates is innocent of the accusations brought against him by Meletus, Anytus and Lycon because the jury was made up of men who already had a biased opinion of him, he does not earn his living by corrupting the young and the accusation of having created one's divinities has never been validated. Socrates enters the trial recognizing the fact that he is up against a jury of men, many of whom already have a biased and negative view of him. He explains that many of them, even though they don't know him personally, think they do so based solely on word of mouth, weakening the validity of the case against him. As Socrates states in the account of his defense; these accusers are numerous, and have been doing so for a long time, furthermore they spoke to you at an age when you would easily believe them, some of you children and adolescents, and they won the case by default, because there was no defense (Plato qtd . in Melchert 18c). He accepts the fact that he must defend himself and as he states “try to eradicate from your minds in so short a time the slander which has resided in you for so long” (Plato qtd. in Melchert 19a). . These are not people who can actually serve as witnesses to his wrongdoings, yet they (the audience) testified that he did not commit the alleged crimes of "walking on air and talking a lot of other nonsense" (Plato qtd. in Melchert 19c) . Then he turns first... to the middle of the paper..., since I believe in divine beings (Plato qtd in Melchert 27d). Smith 6 These "new" accusations by Meletus, Anito and Licon clearly originated from the old accusations which his first accusers could not fully prove before, and from the rumors which everyone has heard growing up, and therefore should not be seen as new accusations. Socrates' accusers clearly have a bias against him from the beginning, demonstrated by the lack of evidence combined with the fact that he is brought before the jury under false pretenses regarding accusations of corrupting the youth and creating his own deities. This shows that Socrates was actually accused and put to death unjustly for the simple reason that he had fallen out of favor with the men of Athens and not because he had actually broken any laws..