We define shaming to be unauthorized, negative communication to non-members about a member’s behavior inside the community, where negative is defined by the member on a case-by-case basis.

The police aren't members, saying that a member assaulted you is likely to be perceived by that member as negative communication, and if they assaulted you at a conference then you're describing behaviour that happened within the community. How does this not meet the definition?

I explicitly said that I don't think this is deliberate: I don't think the authors of this policy would want to defend the idea that you can't report something to the police. I said that it's indicative of not actually spending time thinking about what happens in response to the behaviour of actual abusers.