"many rape cases with no witnesses and big memory lapses do not meet the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt – hence the torrent of not-guilty verdicts."
Then why were they ever taken to court in the first place... really, "big memory lapses"... why would you ever take a case like that to court and ruin the life of a very possibly innocent person? This "torrent" of perfectly reasonable not guilty verdicts will then be used to show that the system is not working for "survivors".
.
But here is what they are really after:
"Increasingly, survivors’ advocates have been pushing for alternatives to criminal justice that might get more victims to come forward and might hold more offenders responsible."
They want to be able to punish the accused without the burden of proof that a criminal court case entails. To paraphrase an old movie "Proof? Proof? We don't need no steenkin' proof!"