"Innocent until proved guilty" does not imply that defendants shouldn't be named. There's no law that says that you can't name a person before they've even been charged.
Except the law of 'defamation of character' should it turn out that they are not charged.

There's a debate to be had on all this for sure, and there is ongoing debate in high places. "Innocent until proved guilty" as a principle doesn't work very well in sex abuse cases, largely because in that area of criminality more than most "mud sticks," "there's no smoke without fire," etc.
Unfortuately, in sex cases, the 'mud' only sticks to the defendant, as they can be identified while the complainant can't.

If a court finds you innocent of an armed robbery, simply because you didn't do it, your good name is restored.
Only if you can prove you didn't do it. If it's just a case of 'insufficient evidence' then an element of doubt remains. anyway, The court doesn't find you 'Innocent', it finds you 'not guilty', at which time the 'presumption of innocence' becomes the fall back position again.