What I read was that (1) she accused him of rape -- he said he did not and maligned her for a false accusation -- (2) she took him to court -- (3) the jury did not could not find the evidence to convict him of rape -- (4) they did find him guilty of sexual assault -- (5) the judge gave her damages of $5m for him malingering her because she accused him of rape -- What I read was that the appellant court appears to have a problem -- I could find the the link -- but there it is -- guilting of maligning her for a rape charge that could not be proven