Similar to those who will insist the woman in question admitted lying. She actually didn’t. She has never done so.
The whole narrative, led by Charles himself was that she lied and he campaigned for accused rapists to remain anonymous. It’s telling that from the start she was described as “former stripper” putting that first before the fact she was his girlfriend. Inviting all to judge her for her profession, perhaps to suggest she might be less believable, or maybe she deserved it because after all, strippers are just asking for it. This was undoubtedly used by the defence team, DARVO is the standard process.
Maybe he (and his friend) didn’t rape her. He has gone on to further build his career, it was barely a blip, so the allegations the jury decided were false haven’t really affected him. I would assume if she lied her life has been forever changed by the outcome, she will have struggled. She will forever be the woman who falsely accused him of rape. Good result all round.
On the other hand, if they did rape her, he has gone on to further build his career. Her life will have been forever changed by the outcome. She will forever be the woman who falsely accused him of rape. And she has to come to terms with the fact she was raped by two men. Good result for Craig Charles though.
Using the outcome of any rape trial to prove the innocence of the accused is very misleading. It is the one area of the justice system that just doesn’t work. Legally we have to assume Charles was not guilty. Given that only 1% or rapists ever see a day in prison, it’s quite fair to assume he may not have been.