He had literally met with the NYE victim that morning. I don't have a problem with him responding to a terrible incident that wasn't his fault by promoting a free seminar.
He explained the URL thing mainly being about keeping detractors from taking it and
that would look a lot like this. He also removed the redirect due to public backlash and apologized for it.
Given that I am neither a woman nor an attendee of these seminars, I couldn't begin to answer the first question. As to the other questions, it's been in the news locally and any search for "lloyd irvin rape" is going to produce news about the NYE and 1989 case. Suffice it to say that even if they don't reveal any of this history in the seminars, anybody who can't find info on it simply isn't looking.
The "false sense of security" bit really comes down to someone anyone mistaking anything self-defense related for a guarantee of safety. I mean cmon, even guys who train regularly in multiple martial arts are susceptible to that. But if they can apply something they've learned to protect themselves, that's a win. Nothing is 100% effective.
But setting that issue aside (because it's a whole other debate in its own right), I don't really see how Irvin is any less qualified to do these seminars now than he was in December. You can argue it's in poor taste that he host these, but I think the positives greatly outweight that. As I said before, given his past, I think it'd be in much worse taste if he did nothing to help women protect themselves. At least he's trying to help.
And yes, if it gives him or his school a better image, that's an ancillary benefit. Lots of things we do every day give us ancillary benefits. For example, one of my best friends met his wife at work, that doesn't mean he took the job in order to meet women.