Except saying that a victim has a "part" in their own victimization is, indeed, victim blaming, even if someone says it's not.
We all know ET wasn't physically forced I get into the car. Beyond that, we know she is 50, he's 50 and was her teacher and that evidence showed he groomed her for months and she was conflicted. So beyond determining how the facts match up with the elements of various possible charges, there is nothing "wrong" with refusing to state the victim had a "part" in her own victimization.
A kid that age cannot legally consent because they are easily manipulated by older adults. Especially when they are already vulnerable from abuse. Especially when their molester is in a position of trust and authority over them and is charged with caring for them and disciplining them, etc.
I get that this blows people's minds but just because he didn't drag her off kicking and screaming, just because she didn't refuse to leave her house or refuse to get in the car with the predator or fail to alert her family as to his intentions, just because she expressed "love" for him and that she was his "wife" on social media, just because she didn't ask for help from someone during the ordeal, does NOT mean she went with him "willingly". For reasons that have been discussed on here extensively:
A kid that age who is vulnerable, lacks sophistication and wisdom, is dying for attention and grossly manipulated and groomed for months by her abductor, lacks the ability or maturity to make a decision as to whether she is going to be subject to abuse, or not. Or whether she is going to leave her family to go across state lines with a predator. How on earth could she have known what was going to happen to her or where they'd go? Of the dangers involved? That she could die from him trying to cross international waters into Mexico with her. Or that she would be totally cut off from phones or internet. Or that she'd lose weight from lack of food. Or would be gone or over two months.
My God. The kid thought she might come back that night!
A child can't be "willing" if they don't have all the info or the capacity to understand the ramifications.
Which is why this is illegal.
Of course it is differentiated from other crimes that involve actual force, like forcible rape and sexual assault crimes, and aggravated or especially aggravated kidnapping.
That's how this case differs from others. But no underage victim plays a part in their abuse.
And frankly, the insistence that she was a "willing" partner in this, or that she played her "part", acts to downplay the seriousness of the crime, IMO.