So Mary K. is out and able to see her ... boy? man? rape victim? children's father? I like Mary K.! I believe her situation is unusual, and I cannot really put myself in her shoes and experience empathy, but it's pretty clear to me that she is no sex offender.
The whole statutory rape (or "rape of a child", as they now call it in Washington state) legislation is kinda silly. I mean, from the formal point of view, the age of consent varies from state to state and is sometimes different depending on the gender of the partners. From a practical point of view, it is obvious that individuals reach maturity (sexual and of discernment) at ... um ... Individual ages, a fact that a blanket piece of legislation can never accommodate.
What would be an alternative? Well, we could just get rid of the age of consent and consider each case of alleged rape on an individual basis. It is ridiculous to treat sexual relations between an adult and any minor (one stops being a minor anywhere between the ages of 12 and 18, depending on the place they live -- doesn't that sound strange to you?) as rape. Vili very clearly didn't resent Mary K.'s advances. He impregnated her, for God's sake! Twice! Besides, rape very rarely leaves no physical marks (bruises, tears, etc.), especially in the case of a child, which makes establishing the facts easy. And finally, it is wrong to assume that children are unable to express what has happened to them. They may not be articulate about it, but they will be extremely vocal when something has upset them!
So, yeah, we should all be able to have lawful sex with 16 year-old hotties!