[WARNING: Graphic descriptions at the links.]

I'm guessing you mean this case. Sounds like the jury had a couple of reasons to justify that verdict which weren't directly about the evidence. Doesn't mean it wasn't the right one, but without witnesses that will never be known.

I do think that if you play stupid games you might win stupid prizes, so while I feel circumspect here I am certainly not going to lose any sleep for the guy who decided to violate other people as he did. It isn't super obvious whether he called himself "trans" in any context (including on Tinder where apparently he just pretended to be female), or was just a sexual predator who didn't try to convince anyone else he was female at other times.

Nonetheless...he won't get to violate anyone like that again. I am okay with this. Though it sounds like a guilty verdict would not have been that hard to reach otherwise. The defendant didn't actually need to go back to that guy's home and walk into a potentially dangerous situation. He was also 18 though, which means still capable of poorer judgment than he might be at an older age. So it's not surprising that he wanted to know for sure what had been done to him. I think that's a fair desire to have.

Here's a rather woke-tinged, rape-apologist-leaning article that tries to paint the deceased (I won't dignify him with the word "victim" here) as trans, when his family said only that he was an "out gay man" (which makes him a garden-variety sick f*ck—for all we know the deceased was anti-trans and using that ruse because he got off on it, which would make it really strange for the local TQ+ people to want to defend him, but they aren't thinking about that, just that this is another story they can spin to prove their victimhood): https://www.metroweekly.com/2021/06/virginia-tech-football-player-charged-with-second-degree-murder-in-death-tinder-acquaintance/