I mean. That gets super complicated. See, the problem there isn’t limited to sexual assault. It’s all assault. Or really any crime against a live accuser. The beyond a reasonable doubt provision always puts the burden of proof on the prosecution. Because the justice system isn’t about the victim. The victim in American justice is just a witness. The crime is actually prosecuted by the state. Everyone else is collateral.
So yes, by design you implicitly call the live victim a liar by exonerating the defendant. I might not LIKE that but I understand it.
And if she’d taken that course of argument… she might have something. One could argue that the legal system is designed to give the benefit of the doubt to the defendant. The in-house system of many schools is not in some cases. It gives the benefit of doubt to the defendant. Devos could have therefore argued that the system is unjust because it undermines the legal system. The argument would have been cold hearted. Downright abhorrent even. But it’s a better argument than what she gave.