From the article, Dan and Tanja are superiors in a workplace, not unrelated folks in a volunteer project. It's their responsibility to ensure a safe place to work - telling people to take it to the courts is an unreasonable way to start dealing with an internal HR problem.

They do not reflect a reasonable grasp of how functional workplaces happen, how the legal system works, or what the university policies they he is bound to follow require.

Even something as simple as his insistence that either the crime of rape or the crime of slander has been committed is naive and wrong, and it closely reflects one of the more damning sections from the linked blog post. (The issues are, briefly, that 1) it's not a binary and both or neither could easily be true 2) even if it was a binary result set, the legal system doesn't render innocent verdicts; all it can do is decide if something has been shown beyond reasonable doubt 3) all of that is irrelevant to his role as a supervisor and his responsibility to provide a safe workplace; he has obligations to take actions both before the legal system renders a verdict and regardless of what that verdict actually is.)