as you can see there is past precedence for insignificant evidence from seized devices being used to bring down what should have been considered genuine rape cases.

Your quote doesn't provide evidence that "insignificant evidence" is admitted in court at all. If cases fall apart because of phone texts, that is because it casts reasonable doubt. Again courts don't admit "insignificant evidence" -- there are legal protections against that in the UK.

people keep claiming to be on the side of justice with policies like this ignoring the 97% of cases that are genuine and where the victim is persecuted.

There's no evidence that proves 97% of cases are genuine; the reported figure is the number proven malicious. Rape is a hard crime to prove "beyond reasonable doubt".