"Abigail was right to be confused. Under her state’s law, what Grant did was not technically illegal..."

"... even though he later admitted that he knew Abigail wasn’t consenting to sex with him. That’s because in Indiana, sex only becomes rape when it’s compelled through force or threats, if the victim is mentally disabled and can’t properly consent, or if he or she is unaware that the sex is occurring. Abigail knew she was having sex. She just didn’t know it was with Grant.... When you have sex with someone, are you agreeing to sleep with just the physical entity before you? Or is it something bigger and more complex? Many people might think a man who deceives his sister-in-law into sex by pretending to be his identical twin should be prosecuted. But what of the man who deceives a woman by pretending to be some other fake, more successful — or even single — version of himself? And what of the legions of lies behind so many online dating profiles where people falsely advertise themselves using the scantest of information?"

From "She Thought She Was In Bed With Her Boyfriend, Until She Saw His Face/'I was like, I feel violated. This feels wrong. But I don’t know if it’s illegal'/This woman's case has exposed a loophole in rape laws" (BuzzFeed News).

ADDED: I puzzled over what's wrong with the sentence "Many people might think a man who deceives his sister-in-law into sex by pretending to be his identical twin should be prosecuted. " It's that there's no antecedent for "his." ADDED:  No. Wait. That's not the problem. The 2 "his"s refer to the man who you might think should be prosecuted. What's confusing is that we're not told who his identical twin is. We can infer that it's his sister-in-law's husband, of course, but you have to stop and think about it, and that's awkward, because of the "his"s.