SC: No rape if drunk victim does NOT "fight back"

In a rape case in which the complainant claims drunkenness, she must present proof that she resisted even before the sexual act could be consummated and that her drunkeness has deprived her of the will power to give her consent.

Three things are thus clear from the testimony of "AAA:" first, appellant never employed the slightest force, threat or intimidation against her; second, "AAA" never gave the slightest hint of rejection when appellant asked her to have sex with him; and, third, appellant did not act with force since he readily desisted when "AAA" felt the slightest pain and tried to move during their sexual congress.

"AAA" could have resisted right from the start. But she did not, and chose not to utter a word or make any sign of rejection of appellant's sexual advances. It was only in the middle of their sexual congress when "AAA" tried to move which can hardly be considered as an unequivocal manifestation of her refusal or rejection of appellant's sexual advances.
Citing People v. Amogis, the Court held that resistance must be manifested and tenacious. A mere attempt to resist is not the resistance required and expected of a woman defending her virtue, honor and chastity. And granting that it was sufficient, "AAA" should have done it earlier or the moment appellant's evil design became manifest. In other words, it would be unfair to convict a man of rape committed against a woman who, after giving him the impression thru her unexplainable silence of her tacit consent and allowing him to have sexual contact with her, changed her mind in the middle and charged him with rape. (People vs. Tionloc; G.R. No. 212193; February 15, 2017)

In this particular case, however, the complainant kept silent while the sexual act was being committed. And though claiming to be drunk, she managed to go home after the incident. SOURCE: SC acquits man of rape, citing no proof of woman’s resistance, use of force; By: Tetch Torres-Tupas - Reporter / @T2TupasINQ / 07:01 PM May 05, 2017; Read more: Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook