I do not doubt that the cops are capable of using sexual assault as intimidation and punishment and actually believe that they do it more often than we hear. I hope that the defendants are recovering from such abuse and that the perpetrators of such abuse are held accountable for sexual assault, violence and intimidation.
As far as the article goes, however, it is a terrible take on the perception of protesters as peaceful, liberal types as being good and the ‘rowdy’ as bad, punishable protesters. That perception is commonly held but legally unconstitutional. Protesting is a form of free speech. If your protest is angry in tone, it is no more illegal than if it is somber in tone or silly in tone. Different opinions are expressed by the tone of a protest. I have seen satirical, funny protests that mock the status quo done very effectively, just as I have seen somber protests, angry raging protests, and festive, jovial protests done effectively. Tone policing has no place in free speech, in fact, that is the point of free speech being protected by law.
The title is click-bait-like and I wonder if it was intentionally written to paint that picture of the good vs. the bad protester stereotype or if the author is just ignorant of the problems such stereotypes pose to the many defendants in the J20 case.