Gonna call the victim's evidence weak and then posit that this will exonerate him?

Nope, I'm not. I dunno anything about this case, just that you were asking a question that was answered in the next sentence, which is usually a sign of someone acting in bad faith.

The evidence the victim has already produced is compelling.

I firmly disagree. The ONLY evidence contemporary to the events that exists are screenshots of facebook messages that do not explicitly state that Platner raped her. Everything else is either recent or has been deleted. Read the original articles carefully, there's a lot of people spreading misinformation, recasting recent messages as older than they were described in the articles. I don't think you're doing that intentionally, but you should be aware you're spreading falsehoods.