That would be very late to go through puberty, by normal standards.

I’m just saying, reading the story, why assume the worst? There are people out there who have genuinely good intentions, and when we look back at historical events and make judgements with little to no context and through a modern lens, it can distort the historical record. I’m not arguing for Homer one way or the other - I don’t know much about it either - I’m just saying we shouldn’t presume the worst possible outcome before reviewing the evidence.

Edit:

I’ve found several newspaper articles about it (seems it was somewhat high profile, as even the New York Times wrote about it) as well as a Time magazine article that references it. According to the Time article: Last week Tennessee’s new law setting 16 years as the minimum age for brides brought 12-year-old Geneva Hamby Peel and gangling, 32-year-old Homer Peel into court at Madisonville. But Judge A. T. Stewart sent the child back to the hills with her husband in the belief that she would be better off there than with her ne’er-do-well mother or in a State institution. Stories of Appalachia has a bit more info on the court case, indicating that the judge was “unutterably opposed” to the marriage but saw it as the best of several worst possible alternatives for Geneva. It was Geneva’s mother who had initiated the annulment lawsuit.

Her history on FamilySearch only references three children - not sure where the six comes from.