@vivainsomnia
Maybe because with what's happened and the hatred for the police encouraged by the media, the BBC is concerned that the guy will be found guilty by the masses before it even goes to trial.
MNers here have clearly done so already. No possibility at all that maybe just maybe, there is a small chance that he didn't rape her?
You realise that for a case to be prosecuted, the cos has to have sufficient evidence for a case to proceed, right? That rape trials don't just get to court on the basis of a single accusation?
You also realise that when rapists are acquitted it rarely means they didn't do it, it often just means the jury cannot convict based on the evidence they are presented with?
For a rape case to get to trial, there is already significant evidence. There must be for it to be in the public interest.
And if you've ever acted on a jury, you'll know that your decision-making process is very much guided by the judge in terms of what you are required to deliberate upon. Which often isn't as straightforward as a 'did he/didn't he' scenario.
Rape cases getting to court where the accused was completely innocent rarely happen. Rape cases getting court and than failing because the evidence required to convict beyond reasonable doubt, happen frequently because rape often happens in private, behind closed doors, away from witnesses. My friend's case failed even when there was cctv evidence.
So the likelihood that this man is didn't do it and has been falsely accused, is pretty much nil, based on the above.