The senator “will fight to prove he never intended to administer a substance on his colleague and longstanding friend to abuse her,” said his lawyer, Remi-Pierre Drai.

That’s lawyer talk for “the drink was spiked but it wasn’t intentional”. Also, note that he refrains from saying his client never did something - be it spike the drink or intend to do so - just that it’s gonna be his line of defense.

In other words, in non-lawyer talk: the guy looks as guilty as a puppy sitting next to a pile of poo.

Apologies, I’ve tried MDMA (powdered ecstasy) and enjoyed it well enough. It didn’t strike me as something that would make a person vulnerable to sexual assault. Is it used for that purpose? Is it just a difference in dosing?

Never drink and spike.

Drinking: fine

Spilling: …