This is a great way to make sure you have an unjust community wherein no one has the opportunity to defend themselves and speaking ill of someone is enough to evict them.
The leaders of the Tor community were shown evidence they considered to be sufficient to boot this guy. It's a community they lead, they get to decide who is welcome. You want to start your own community and welcome him with open arms, you go right ahead.
That said, yes, they do lend a lot of legitimacy to this claim, but it just concerns me that no one has publicly put their name on a rape allegation and nothing has been taken up legally.
There's the problem of false accusations, but I think there is enough "evidence" with this many coming forward (and many non-anonymously) and that Tor kicked him out too.
However, the blog post discussed here nor anyone in the thread has suggested that that should be done so I'm confused why you are fixated on it.
You slide right past my assertion that the Tor community must be able to decide who is welcome in the Tor community and refer to a nebulous "privacy community" now. Is the "privacy community" even at issue? I don't know what that is. If there is a group called the "privacy community", then yes, I agree, they should decide who is welcome in their club.
As far as I know, he's not being prosecuted. The only rights he acquires from not being prosecuted are that he won't go to jail. Right? He doesn't have any automatic right to join my club, your club, or the Tor community's club.
There isn't an easy answer here.