In rape, force need NOT be irresistible; rapist's intimidation produces fear

Another established rule in rape cases is that the force need not be irresistible; all that is necessary is that the force used by the accused is sufficient to CONSUMMATE his evil purpose, or that it was successfully used. It need not be so great or of such character that it could not be repelled. Intimidation, on the other hand, must be viewed in light of the victims perception and judgment at the time of the commission of the crime and not by any hard and fast rule; it is enough that it produces fear, fear that if the victim does not yield to the bestial demands of the accused, something would happen to her at that moment, or even thereafter as when she is threatened with death if she would report the incident. In this case, the accused embraced Gilda from behind, held her neck tightly, and covered her mouth. As she struggled to free herself, she sustained her injuries. Dr. Bernales confirmed the use of force, and according to him, the abrasions and contusions on Gildas body were due to force applied on her. Moreover, the accused also threatened Gilda with death if she would not yield to his bestial desires. The threat certainly constituted intimidation. [G.R. No. 117217. December 2, 1996]