Ya ya, bukak pintu luas luas = kena rogol while unconscious.

It's official guise, being unconscious is an invitation to rape. Sama la dengan mabuk kerja kandang rimau atau tak kunci pintu rumah bukak luas luas. /s

Uhh drunk driving IS an offense? Try again my dear.

Another stupid logic. /k/ is full of stupid people
Your analogy is so wrong
You drunk and drive and hit people = You mabuk and have sex and rape people
--> Drinking and driving is wrong, rape people whether mabuk or not also is wrong

You mabuk and get raped = You mabuk while stading tepi jalan and kena langgar by non mabuk people
--> This case, rapist is wrong, and non mabuk driver langgar you is wrong
--> Mabuk is not an offense, standing tepi jalan while mabuk not an offense
No wonder so many rapist in this world. All stem from logic bodo

”Having consented to having sexual intercourse with one individual, she was then raped by three other men,” Deputy Public Prosector G. Kannan told the Singapore High Court.

”Intoxicated and asleep, she was unaware of what was going on around her. She was taken advantage of and raped in quick succession by the three.”

Where was it said that she consented to having sex with 4 people? It was only mentioned that she consented to having sex with 1 person.
Of course its her words against theirs, and a possible defense for the 3 guys is to say that she consented. We wont know unless we attend the hearing. But if we are arguing based on this article, then the consent was given only to 1 person. And the issue isn't that person raping her, its the other 3.

For all you know, the other 3 could've gotten consent from that 1 guy, which that 1 guy was not in position to give consent.
Or, that 1 guy could've passed out also, and the 3 guys raped her without that 1 guys' knowledge
Or that 1 guy was forced by those 3 guys to just accept

In any case, for that 1 guy to abscond and run away makes me opine that he isn't innocent.