A fallacy of hypocrisy?

Since the metoo movement I have seen some of this happening...

If an alleged rapist is determined by the courts to be guilty then random person Terry applauds the legal system. Terry takes this as proof that the legal system is effective when it comes to punishing rapists. However, if an alleged rapist is determined to be innocent by the courts then Terry takes this as evidence that the legal system is flawed. This is hypocritical because if Terry believes that the legal system is flawed when it deems an alleged rapist to be innocent then Terry should also find the legal system to be flawed when it deems an alleged rapist to be guilty.

More generally, if anyone claims that the legal system can be trusted when citing a case where they agree with the outcome, then later claim the legal system can't be trusted due to the outcome of another case in which they didn't agree, this is certainly fallacious reasoning. I guess it would fit under hypocrisy.

Double standard fallacy maybe?...lol I just happened upon this one so I'm taking a guess..

This could be a kind of special pleading - in that you hold courts to be effective for everyone else, but flawed in the individual cases where they disagree with you on your pet issue.