It's seriously weakens your case when you claim more than the evidence proves. There's no question that consent is impossible for an enslaved person, and that Jefferson should be condemned for raping Sally Hemmings. (It's possible that the DNA evidence could be explained by placing the blame on Jefferson's brother, but given the time that Jefferson spent with Ms. Hemmings, he is a more likely culprit).

But you have no justification for the title of this article except the very dubious inference from the fact that Jefferson met Hemmings when she was fourteen. You offer no evidence that he had sex with her at that time. In fact, the evidence you present implies otherwise. Sally Hemmings' first child was born when she was 22. From then on, her pregancies were at intervals of 3, 1, 2, 4 and 3 years. If Jefferson had started having sex with Hemmings at 14, the interval between the start of sexual relations and the first pregancy would have been 8 years, a highly unlikely outlier in this pattern. It's far more likely that he started having sex with her when she was 19 or 20.

In other words, he was a rapist, but he was not a child rapist. That is all you need to make your other points. When you overstate your case you leave yourself vulnerable to refutations of this relatively minor point, which gives the false appearance of refuting your other valid points. We are supposed to be the side where truth matters, and that means not embracing bad arguments just because you like their conclusions.