[Skywalk]

Here's the problem. Your approach of "not slandering" would require me, if accused, to not point out how the charges might be motivated by something other than the truth.

Me or my friends would be prohibited from pointing out that "girls make up rape claims all the time, and this is supported by the DoJ/FBI statistics." They'd also be prohibited, by you, from pointing out that the girl is unstable, or that she wasn't acting like a victim after the alleged event, that she was drinking and making out with me at a party, etc Whatever the particular circumstance in a case, I'd be forbidden(socially) from pointing this out, even if I'm innocent, just because.

Why is that? If I'm guilty of nothing, or of poor but NON-CRIMINAL judgment, why can I not turn the focus back on the accuser? These crimes are different than murder, robbery, etc. one reason is evidence and motive necessary for a good case in the others, and the social cost to the accused is completely different. If you're acquitted of burglary, most will assume you are indeed not guilty. If you're acquitted of child molestation or rape, you're still guilty in the eyes of many out there.

[cinFLA]

Here's the problem. Your approach of "not slandering" would require me, if accused, to not point out how the charges might be motivated by something other than the truth.

Not at all. It merely requires one to keep an OPEN mind as to guilt/innocence and NOT slander either person. Get real.