A star-struck 16 year old answers a provocative question with a game response, accepts keys, goes to the hotel room at night, lets herself in, engages in legally consensual sexual activity with one person, continues to participate when a 3rd person joins the activity though she "felt uncomfortable" and, while she reports that it got a little rough, also reported that "there was no force", but that she "felt" she had no choice, which isn't the same as asserting that she did not have a choice.

Stallone's camp says "it never happened." I guess the legal play is "it" what? The sex? The roughness? The threesome? What words may or may not have been spoken before, during or after these activities?

One thing seems evident - she was of legal consenting age in the state of Nevada, and reports she did consent to having sex with Stallone. That, alone, does not mean they had sex. It only means that, if they did have sex, it was legally consensual and, therefore, not sexual assault. As for the bodyguard, well, he's since deceased, so there is no case to repoen, and certainly none against Stallone, on the basis of this incident alone. Which brings me to some consolation...

Another thing seems evident - power/sex predators are patternistic, not one-offish. As we've seen with allegations against so many lately (Cosby, Weinstein, C.K., Ratner, Toback, Spacey), such people lather, rinse, repeat their modus operandi, and leave a trail of damage behind them in the form of many victims over many years.

So, if Stallone is going to join this list of predators, other victims should start coming out of the woodwork, the preponderance of their stories will accumulate, and the collective weight of them will be compelling/damning. If this single allegation is all there is, it'll be difficult to take it as truth, because it'd be unlikely he did this once, got away with it, but then didn't feel emboldened to do it again.