Seems possible to me that given the man’s exoneration on rape, they might look more seriously afterward at her role in the fiasco. At least if the issue is dealt with intelligently, but they say that military intelligence is an oxymoron.
I can’t find any details anywhere, not even the officer’s name. Without knowing more, it’s hard to say more than I have. I just know that fraternization is typically handled administratively (hand over pay), and the officer being treated as such would be SOP. Which she was, having a letter of caution on her record.
It should also be noted that rank notwithstanding, senior personnel is always expected to handle themselves better than their juniors. An ensign will be treated administratively more like a seaman, and a chief more like a commander, even though an ensign outranks a CPO. Those who’ve never served would find that uniquely military nuance hard to grasp, as I don’t think there is a parallel anywhere in the civilian world.
It seemed to me (if I read the article right, and assuming the article was clear and accurate) the she *falsely* accused him of rape since she later admitted to fraternizing with him on the *one* night either of them claimed to be together. I would think that bringing false charges against him would call for more than a written reprimand and promotion??