She was asked to leave and has been told on past occasions she can’t be there, she didn’t leave and she returned when she was told not to. She was asked to appear at a precinct for questioning. She said no. She was detained. Kind of like if you get pulled over on suspicion of DUI and ask for you to do a sobriety test. You can say no, but it means you’re going to be detained until a warrant is sworn out compelling you to submit blood for testing. She was asked to go in, she said no, she was detained until she was charged and compelled to answer questions. Charges that could have been avoided if she had obeyed the first order to not return there, or the second order to go to a station for questioning.
And the whole innocent until proven guilty refers to punishments and repercussions for crimes committed. It means the police can’t implement the punishments of somebody who is guilty upon her. It doesn’t mean they can’t arrest her. It has nothing to do with levying charges, which is what these are, or analyzing the merit of the charges, which is what we are doing. So the statement “innocent until proven guilty” is wholly irrelevant in this scenario