Even if she did invite him in, how did that give him the right to rape her?
What I'm saying is that all we have is her statement that he raped her, FIVE YEARS ago, and he denies raping her, saying they had consensual sex.
I'm pointing out some inconsistencies. From the article, they had been in communication. They meet at a hotel. They got a room. They went to the room. They went to sleep together in the room. All this is agreed by the two.
The point of disagreement is on whether there was consent. My point is that her accusations are inconsistent with the facts, and therefore I do not believe her accusations.