I can understand the Court granting defense motions re potential prejudicial statement from the prosecution. But, this move away from "rape" is a step too far...

OK, so you could describe the violent sexual act without using the word "rape", and jurors surely would reasonably understand the act for what it is. I think it's important, though, to remember that rape is about lots more than sex -- it's about the victims loss of control... or, better said, it's about the rapist gaining power over the victim and taking control.

So, now we have rape victims at risk for or sufferring from post-rape psychopathology entering a courtroom and being told you can't say that word here... adding to the initial insult, the victim no longer even has control over her[or his] own narrative...

And there's the trivial matter of how charging documents are worded -- I assume the relevant statutes still use the word "rape", so you really can't keep the word away from the jury... can you?...