I think there are good reasons to think the relationship she had with that man at age 12 was consensual.

The main two reasons are this:

1) She continuously met with the man on several occasions, a man who did not have any special degree of power over her. If these experiences were non-consensual, then why would she continuously meet with him privately? This one was common sense.

2) Why did she wait well over 17 years to finally report this guy? And, in an interconnected question, was it a coincidence that she just happened to report him some months after he contacted her again when she was 29--after she just so happened to be married to a police officer who would go out of his way for obvious reasons to convince her to report that man?

Playing devil's advocate on occasion is fine, but if you continue doing it on a constant basis, then personal experience will tell me that you are using the claim of being a perpetual devil's advocate to cover up what are actually your real opinions of a certain subject.