Whether she was impaired before she went to the house or was injured before then, it's irrelevant. She did not ask to be gang-raped. Let it play out. the truth and the evidence will point to who is right in this case.
The problem with rape as a crime is that it ultimately hinges on consent and an activity that may not leave a clear trace. Either party can lie about what happened and whether or not consent has been given, with the rapist claiming that nothing happened or consent was given when it wasn't or a person claiming they were raped claiming that something happened that didn't or that no consent was given when it really was. Often, there are no other witnesses or recordings of what happened, so it's a "he said/she said" situation.
In a society that assumes innocense until guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, any woman making a rape allegation is required to prove something for which the evidence may be unclear and the most important evidence is her word. Don't be surprised if the guys get off here, even if they are guilty, because she not only has to prove sexual activity but non-consensual sexual activity. And despite what the judge might tell the jury, the fact that she came there to take her clothes off is going to create reasonable doubt over whether she'd consent to have group sex with a bunch of guys.
Wait a minute, didn't she work for an escort service? Sorry, where I live that's just the legal term for a hooker. Gang raped? Why? Oops...did the guys not pay her for enough tricks? I'm not condoning the "use" of a "dancing" hooker...since it's pretty illegal in most states...but I have to say I'm proud of these guys for sticking together on this.
And what makes you think she was gang raped?? The reporting of Nancy Grace? You unfortuately are clueless....