I don't think he ever actually told them to leave. As for the rest of your post.Cops are not in charge of enforcing "good taste."
I don't think they have any authority to order reporters off private property UNLESS the owner or resident of that property asked the cops to kick them off the premises.
Being 'appalled' is not legal authority to interfere with their right to investigate newsworthy events.
As for the "rape shield" laws, those may legitimately limit the news media in PUBLISHING the victim's identity (just like other privacy laws apply to her DOB, address, SSN, medical issues, etc.). But if the news station is just INVESTIGATING this incident and doesn't want to take some cop's write-up in the official version of the police report as the Gospel truth which omits nothing of any significance, the media has the right to investigate. Maybe they want to clarify some inconsistencies with the woman's story? Maybe they just want to publicize this bad thing that happened to her as a public service message that warns other women to be careful and not get into the same situation? Perhaps the news reporters never intended to ID the woman or challenge any aspect of her story, but just wanted to get more details of it so that it would make a more readable and relate-able article?
I'm with the news media on this one.
Now, if the rape victim had been telling these reporters that she doesn't want to talk to them and especially if she ordered them off her property, great. Let the cops chase off the reporters or arrest them for trespassing. But if that were the case, among the first words out of the cops' mouths should be "you were told to leave" rather than "I'm appalled... bad taste...never in my career have I heard of reporters doing anything like this..."