One is a criminal investigation where evidence is planted. The other is not.

What got Stallman taken down was a false claim that he said Epstein's victims were "willing". That was totally a lie, and the equivalent of planting evidence.

"Famed Computer Scientist Richard Stallman Described Epstein Victims As 'Entirely Willing'."

https://archive.is/RVpdd

Was something planted in Stallman's case? Blowing his quotes out of proportion isn't the same thing as planting evidence. I suppose a better analogy is being on your second strike and doing some minor crime to get your third. Some would argue people on two strikes should keep their head down.

Furthermore his quotes are pretty fucking creepy.

Twisting a quote into a different meaning is a lie, and pretty similar to planting evidence. You are saying two strikes, and then we have license to make up a third to take you out.

Selam G wrote that Stallman considered that Minsky's victim was actually willing.

That's not "planting evidence" in a legal sense because sure, that's not evidence at all. Mainly because it isn't true and it's easily verifiable. But in this context, by these people, it has been taken as actual evidence against Stallman. I guess that's the rationale behind the analogy.

It's called "libel".