A child under the age of 13 is legally incapable of giving consent. So any SI would be rape.
13-16 consent is legally 'allowed'.
Surrounding circumstances would be very closely examined ie both parties of a similar age? They are in a 'relationship'? That sort of thing. Consent must be a true, and informed, consent. Not obtained through force, fear or fraud. Libby Squire was totally incapable of consent, due to her inebriation. Therefore, no matter what PR said, the moment his semen was found in her body, it was rape.
SI 13-16 is not automatically an offence of rape.
That is why the offence of Unlawful Sexual Intercourse existed. [Does it still, or has it been amended under more recent legislation?]
The bathroom camera, unless it shows abuse, is only evidence that 'someone', for whatever perverse or unbelievable reasons, put a camera there. Unless someone explains why, and I believe ScW *did* offer up a fairy tale, it is just that - a hidden camera in a bathroom. No proof of who installed it, who it was intended to film, or even what it was intended to film.
It sucks, and the whole case is utterly heartbreaking.
MOO