This is in no way a statement about SH's guilt or innocence - about which I am unqualified to write. I withhold any opinion.
All I wish to say is that I am sceptical of the truth of anything I read in print. ANYTHING by ANYBODY. Not that this SH story is inaccurate, because it might be spot-on in its honest presentation of facts. However, I've seen over and over and over again how the written word twists the truth and even outright lies, because the writer is either unqualified to report accurately, or because bias has interfered with the supposed ability to present the truth.
Just because a journalist says something doesn't mean it's fact! It's a simple concept to comprehend. How many journalists have written that Trump won the election? How often was Rush Limbaugh pulling the wool over the eyes of his followers? People believe what they want to believe, independent of unbiased investigation.
Some writers present their results of groundbreaking research that is new, insightful, and accurate. This MAY be the case here. Some writers should be sweeping out horse manure from barn stalls for a career.