So an accuser's mental condition has no bearing at all on his/her credibility? That's astounding.
In a rape case, if there is physical evidence of forced sexual intercourse, why on earth would the mental condition of the accuser matter? If there was no evidence, and its "he said-she said", then I am with you. But some people are talking as if a persons past should negate physical evidence. Makes no sense.
There is more to this case than credibility - there is evidence. If she was raped, her mental condition is irrelevant.
If someone famous runs a red light and smashes into your car late at night and you sue for damages, is it relevant whether or not you have a dozen unpaid parking tickets? Is it fair for the celebrity's fans to paint you as a golddigger who had no business out on the road at that hour except to set up their hero and take him to the cleaners, and to celebrate a revelation that you once were treated for anxiety attacks?