I am a second-year DPhil student in Legal Philosophy. My thesis question is: when a person A has consented to a person B committing a crime against them, (when) should this consent make a decisive difference in a trial? In other words, (when) should consent be considered a legal justification? I was mainly trained in continental philosophy (Ecole Normale Supérieure of Paris; Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne), analytical philosophy (EHESS; NYU and Oxford as a visiting student) and French law (Paris X Nanterre). I have also done internships in different jurisdictions (Conseil d'Etat, European Court of Human Rights, Paris Administrative Court, Orléans Appeal Court).