There is absolutely nothing simple about it.

First - prosecutors do not take plea bargains on cases where they think they can win in court. They take them on cases where they think there is a good chance they may lose in court in order to get something rather than nothing.

Charges that are dropped first are usually the ones that are hardest/impossible to prove. The entire court system is such that it has become standard practice to 'throw the book' at someone in hopes of making at least one charge stick, often by bargaining down to the one charge they MIGHT have a chance of winning.

A Grand Jury indictment is merely the prosecutor's case. It is not proof. The testimony at it cannot be cross examined. It is purely one side of the story in an intentionally confrontational system.

If you want to take the legal system accepts as 'fact' in the case as what 'really' happened, then all charges that were dropped in the case do not exist. They were dropped, unproven. The person is INNOCENT of those charges.

The only charge that was admitted to was having sex with someone underage. Period. That particular event IS fact. She was underage. Sex took place. No one disputes those facts. But ONLY those facts are considered proven by the courts. Not the alcohol or forcing or saying no or drugs, nothing.

Just the fact that it happened. Period.

Anything else is a claim which may, or may not have any validity to it and is somewhat compromised by the fact that it wasn't pursued by the prosecution - which means that it was pretty sketchy at least as regards legal proof.

So, not simple. Not simple at all.