A history would require sentencing. Right now it's conjuecture at best. At worst it's slander. As I said the burden of proof is on her. It's not his job to prove innocence, it's hers to prove guilt.Would it? You think they spoke to the accuser the first time round? Why are class mates coming out saying he's lied under oath, I know that's a different matter but maybe they weren't asking the right questions.
If he has a history of sexual assault (3 women have made allegations right?), he's not going to admit it and he's certainly not going to give up names of those women for the FBI to interview.