I do believe she feels raped, and I do feel the sexsomnia excuse is BS especially since other experts say that sexomnia exists only in papers used to defend rapists. There should've been a fair trial to determine if the rape indeed occured according to the rules of law (that does not mean she cannot feel violated if that's ruled out though). But to say that you just blindly need to believe her, or the accused is a but too much for my taste.
I will probably not be liked for this opinion but I hope we don't fall into the trap of always believing one or the other side without critical thinking. The victim deserves to be believed so that there will be an investigation and a court ruling and the accused deserves to be presumed innocent until proven otherwise. The judicialsystem is not flawless (see this example) and the negatives from those flaws have impact on both the accused and the victim. Only not always in the same amount or in the same time.
They'll make the replacement so expensive nobody will do it. And then there will be a new rule mandating it needs to be a reasonable price. Apple will say it's reasomable because it factors in environmental costs, and so the dance continues.