Well, I've referred my previous post to Admin with a message asking for clarification.
It's a catch 22 situation. We shouldn't name and shame without proof, but can't show the proof. All forums have fantasists and people with an axe to grind. We just have to make our own minds up based on who we trust and how much we trust them.
I couldn't decide whether to name her or not. In the end, as there were already posts on here quoting her as previously saying condoms were effectively optional, I decided to go ahead.
If it turns out that I was wrong to do that - apologies to everyone and I'll take the consequences. I just thought it was better that everyone knew abut her.