So bring your witness, love
This story reminded me of those cases the Muslim-haters love to cite, where women in Muslim countries complain to the authorities that they've been raped and wind up on trial themselves. You know, this sort of thing. (How convenient that JihadWatch have to provide their own translation. And illicit intercourse does indeed require four witnesses, so how can the rape victim, who lacked such witnesses, have been convicted of it? Don't the professional liars at Jihadwatch read their own copy?)
For what it's worth, allegations of rape in Islamic law, unlike those of fornication, have NO witness requirement: the latter provision being precisely to prevent spurious allegations of fornication against women. Zia ul-Haq, the Pakistani military dictator, did however specify such a requirement when he seized power (murdering Benazir Bhutto's dad in the process) , in which case the introduction of Sharia law into Pakistan would ironically bring a considerable improvement to its treatment of women. And that isn't something you'll ever hear from the Islamophobes, for whom military dictators are always preferable to political Islam. (Well, except in Iraq.)
Which isn't to say that everything is rosy for sexually abused women in Islam, oh dear no. Nor for women in general. But let's keep it real, let's not pretend that laws and practices which explicitly contradict Islamic law are the fault of Islam, and let's not imagine that everything is rosy in the UK or USA either.
Oppression of women and its justification by the lack of witnesses is certainly something that's been part of our culture for a long time: