Let's just hold the phone and wait and see what comes out in the trial, shall we? From my quick research I've found that he's been charged with one count of sex with a 17 y/o minor (which, to me, isn't the same as sex with a child) and one count of having child pornography on his computer.
Now, if the law is stating that a 17 y/o is a minor, then it's possible that the "child pornography" is just as sketchy as their determination of what a minor is. IMO, this could be an extortion attempt of the minor ("Pay me X amount of dollars or I'll go to the police because I won't be 18 until next month"). The news I'm reading doesn't say rape of a minor, it just says sexual relations.
Let's hold onto our hats until we get more details. Otherwise it's just a witch-hunt.