Yes, she was naive to go to his room with him.....but in no way was her naivety a signal he could sexually assault her.
A superior man would not have taken advantage of her naivety.
So you believe her without seeing any evidence or testimony?
You’re assuming she is telling the truth.
There exists the possibility that she’s lying about having been forced.
The legal system is too coarse-grained an instrument to resolve such claims 15 years after the fact.
This is why the sexual revolution was designed: as Stalin said, America has three pillars, etc.
One of those being morality.
And if forced to choose between women’s sexual license, and innocent until *proven* guilty, I’m voting to keep the presumption of innocence.
The safeguard (back in the dreaded 1950s) was that women slut shamed each other; a woman’s protestations of outraged virtue were likely true.
Nowadays, the presumption of female purity is long gone, because birth control and “you go g’rllll.”
Women will have to learn, they can’t have it both ways.
Women say they want to be like men ,but they don’t: they just want the latitude of action with guaranteed freedom from consequences.
What do they think the bed on a hotel room is *for*, anyway?