It doesn't really matter whether your drink has been spiked or whether you have voluntarily or accidently drunk too much craps.
That's one of the red herrings little Nicky Ross zeroes in on. I've no proof but experience tells me that Rohypnol is far less common than alcohol.
The reality is that if you have drunk alcohol, and that could be one glass of wine over the course of a meal, which is very likely on a date or night out, the defence barrister will say your judgement is impaired and introduce the doubt that you didn't know what you were doing, so how the hell could the poor man having sex with you know?
The beauty of a jury system is that ordinary people consider the evidence yet apply their common sense and experience to the story they've heard.
And yet in rape trials jurors suspend that common sense and experience, unless of course, they've never been a woman alone with a man who's had a few drinks or have never been the man in that situation.
Articles like Nick Ross's reinforce that doubt. I am truly at a loss to understand why a seemingly intelligent man would believe that there are legions of women itching to make false claims about rape or fear they might fall victim to one of those deluded harpies.