Military servicewoman says senior officer raped her

I might be missing something but I’m not sure what the story here is exactly…

A woman gets drunk, goes back to an officers room with him.
She doesn’t *really* remember a lot of what happens but believes she was raped and can’t recall consenting to sex.
She reports this, but refuses to see a doctor or visit a sexual assault referral centre.
There’s no witnesses to any of it and the other party says they did indeed have sex but it was consensual.

The relevant prosecuting authority, not unreasonably based on the information provided – decline to prosecute saying there just isn’t enough evidence – which based on the article, appears to be a fair assessment?

I’m sure this individual is indeed very upset at what she says happened to her – but I’m not really sure why the BBC consider this newsworthy unless something is being omitted here?

I think, understandably a lot of people are addressing how both parties were drunk. There is therefore an implication of the impossibility of ascribing blame to one party or another.

What nobody has yet addressed is the gap in seniority, and the fact that the senior officer came over and expressed concern for this lady’s well-being. It was on that basis, it is her claim, that she left the party.

If this were just two 20-year-old people meeting in a bar, and going back to each other’s houses I could understand how this would be so unclear as to be challenging to prosecute.

This was a work event, where a senior manager in a military role asked the lady to leave. He had a duty of care to her, and if he actually found her attractive he should maybe have realised how unlikely it would be for him to approach her while sober, therefore definitely don’t do it when you are both drunk.

Finally, none of what I’ve said above definitely leads to a criminal prosecution, but I know that in the private sector and in this day and age, it would be quite likely that the senior officer would not still be in his current position.