English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

Most rape victims know their attackers.' Yet convicting rapists of such nonstranger rapes is particularly difficult.2 When a woman3 is raped by a stranger who jumps out of the proverbial dark alley, courts and jurors tend to assume lack of consent. In acquaintance rapes, however, lack of consent is difficult to prove. Empirical studies indicate that when the victim4 and defendant are not strangers, prosecutors are less likely to prosecute and juries less likely to convict than in stranger rapes.5 As the relationship between defendant and victim becomes closer, there is a greater tendency to presume consent.6 Given that juries and courts are likely to believe that a victim consented in cases where Lhe victim and defendant knew each other previously or were "voluntary social companions"7 at the time of the rape, it is not surprising that

Rethinking the Reasonable Belief Defense to Rape