But, he wasn't?

1. "Minsky has been accused of assault"

2. RMS: "you shouldn't call it assault - might give people the wrong idea"

3. "It would have been literally rape in the relevant territory, 'assault' is a fine word for it"

4. RMS: "ok, even if it's legally rape, it shouldn't morally be considered rape, so don't call it assault if it was 'just' statutory rape."

What inaccuracies did he point out? I see that he expressed his opinion that 'assault' is too strong a word for some cases of rape, but what inaccuracy was there in the original statement regarding the allegations about minsky?