I feel very bad for you, but I honestly don't see this as being the same thing as a mother allowing a daughter to go to a photo-shoot unchaperoned at the age of 13. I don't expect anyone to chaperone their 16 year old daughter everywhere they go, but I think anyone in the free world has heard of the old casting couch scam and wouldn't dream of letting their 13 year old audition or do a photo-shoot alone.
As I've already said, what he did wasn't right but I don't think one can put all the blame on him. If someone is on a diet and you place 3 or 4 beautiful donuts in front of them and they looove donuts, do you expect them to not touch them? The smart thing to do would be to either not offer up the donuts or have the donuts guarded (supervised) so that person cannot touch them.
When a man is his 40's has sex with a 13 year-old it is rape, it is not "sleeping" with her. I doubt very much if he slept.
Plus, he drugged her before he raped her. How can it not be rape when
1. you drug someone
2. have sex with the person you drugged.
Earlier in this very thread, you seemed to blame the 13 year old girl herself by saying "she probably wasn't a virgin anyway" and insinuating she may have agreed to sex with him or words to that effect. I feel like I have stepped back into the dark ages here, when rape was everyone's fault but the perpetrator himself.
Roman Polanski plead guilty, does that mean nothing?
As far as your comparison to donuts in this post of yours I have quoted, I am appalled and extend my heartfelt sympathy and apologies to anyone on this forum reading this that has suffered sexual abuse. To those people I say,
It was NOT your fault, it is totally the rapist's fault.