bottom line - take college-age students + booze and you are going to have sexual behavior. some people may sober up the next day and regret what they did - assuming they remember it. some people may only have a fuzzy memory at best.
some people may genuinely believe there was consent, while the other person(s) involved believe there was no consent.
And - the key - unless the encounter was recorded in some fashion, there is no way to prove what happened. It's entirely possible that Lynch honestly believes he did nothing wrong, while the women believe they were taken advantage of and violated. So, how does any 3rd party decide after the fact what happened? it all comes down to this: who do you believe?
I think there is at least some evidence to suggest that the EOAA is more likely to believe the woman's account over the man's account. That certainly seemed to be the case in the football situation, which ended with several of the EOAA's recommendations being overturned.
But, given the fact that Lynch's reputation is now shot, I suspect that he is not going to be exonerated, unless some contemporary evidence turns up that clearly proves his version of events.