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?
And what if the physical evidence is not conclusive and it comes down to a credibility battle? What if it is plausible that there was consensual sex between the two?
I don't follow your analogy. However, if the accuser in this case has the irrefutable physical evidence equivalent to a smashed up car, then it's a slam dunk for the prosecution. But the physical evidence in this case remains to be seen. So I'll withhold judgement for now.