That does sound pretty bad. I hate this kind of grey area that has arisen where people who are accused of committing a crime, but who have not been proven guilty end up with an in-between half-guilty state. For me if someone tries to run someone over, even in a fairly shit car, that is a crime that ought to be punished with more than cancelling. It feels a bit like in football where the ref doesn't have the nuts to give a penalty so he does some sort of lame fudge such as an indirect free kick in the box or a direct one just outside, neither of which are an appropriate decision for what has occurred.
I guess this sort of thing has always been around but - as with literally every other thing int the world - it's become much more common, more noticeable and faster in the internet era. I don't know what the alternative is and I think that this "believe the woman (or the victim or however it's stated)" assumption is quite possibly a move in the right direction after it being biased way too far in the other direction for so long, though obviously it bring with it its own issues. I just feel the situation we have right now isn't really satisfactory. Although, when is it ever?