I don’t disagree with any of this, especially the last part (except the spelling of whipping, but that’s just picking nits) - but what matters is what can be proved in a court of law, if this gets that far.
Watson’s defense is basically that any sexual encounter alleged was consensual. IMO he has to do this because it’s obvious at this point that there’s towels, robes, underwear or tissues with Watson’s DNA on it/them. So he has to make a claim of consensual contact.
For instances where there is no physical evidence, his best defense is to deny deny deny that ajutjnt happened. The burden of proof is on the accuser(s).
This is his only viable strategy, IMO. And it’s not bad, as strategies go.