"But there is evidence! Two lots of cctv, the testimony of the taxi driver, the testimony of the hotel porter, the fact that she wet herself in her sleep... It isn't just her saying "I can't remember, I must have been too drunk to consent" - there is lots of corroborating evidence as to her state that night."
Yes, there is evidence - but it is contradictory.
We are told the earlier cctv evidence, allegedly shows the complainant falling, stumbling and squatting in a shop doorway. But this, as far as I know, has not been made public, it is difficult for us to make a judgement on it. The evidence from the taxi driver and the hotel porter describes her speech as being slurred, that she had a blank look, disheveled clothing and that she was unsteady on her feet.
On the other hand
We have the complainant herself, saying that she hadn't felt that drunk and stating that she had drunk more on previous occasions, without blacking out. This was borne out by one of her friends, who said in her evidence, that the complainant didn't appear that drunk - just happy.
The complainant appears to have made her own way to the take away and if we are to believe CE's website, she managed to pay for her pizza with the correct change.
If we are to accept the Judge's description of the earlier cctv footage, then it was the complainant who approached CM and not the other way round.
She voluntarily got into the back seat of the taxi and, although the taxi driver described her as having slurred speech and disheveled clothing - it appears she understood and complied with his instruction that she had to sit in the front seat, because she was eating her pizza.
The cctv from the hotel clearly shows her getting out of the taxi unaided and walking into the hotel arm in arm with CM. The cctv and CM's testimony also stated that she was able to realize that she did not have her handbag with her before they walked in though the door.
The porter described her speech as being slurred, but again, if we are to believe CE's website, it was not so slurred, that he could not hear her say to CM "you're not going to leave me are you?", when she realized that the pizza had been left outside and went back to retrieve it.
The cctv footage then shows her walk back outside, completely unaided, squat down, pick up the pizza box with one hand, stand up and walk back into the hotel to re-join CM, without appearing to stumble; all allegedly in a pair of unfamiliar high heeled shoes, which she had supposedly borrowed for the evening, according to CE's website. This appears to contradict the porter's description of her being unsteady on her feet.
This later footage in my view, has greater validity than the earlier footage, because in the timeline, it occurred only moments before the alleged rape began!
Then according to the press reports of the porter's evidence, AFTER CE's arrival, the porter went to check the room. he did not enter the room, but said he could hear "squealing and panting" to the extent that he was in no doubt that people were having sex inside. He also said he heard a man ask the woman to perform oral sex on him. This of course begs two questions WHO was doing the squealing? and if this woman was unconscious, what would be the point of actually asking her to give you a blow job?
As to her wetting the bed - at what point in the at least 7 hours, between her arrival at the hotel, and her waking up with no memory of the previous events did she let go of her bladder?
Finally the complainant did not say she was too drunk to consent. She said that when she woke up at least 7 hour later, she had no memory of how she got into that hotel room or who she'd been with. She said she suspected that her drink had been "spiked". But then said she had not let her drink out of her sight. Furthermore, the prosecution offered no evidence that her drink had been spiked at all - let alone any evidence that either CM, CE or any of their associates had done the spiking.