and that of her testimony. In sum, the defense failed to present sufficiently convincing evidence that KKK is a mere vindictive wife who is harassing the accused-appellant with fabricated rape charges. Alibi It must be stressed that in raising the irrevocable implied consent theory as defense, the accusedappellant has essentially admitted the facts of sexual intercourse embodied in the two criminal informations for rape. This admission is inconsistent with the defense of alibi and any discussion thereon will thus be irrelevant. At any rate, the courts a quo correctly rejected his alibi. Alibi is one of the weakest defenses not only because it is inherently frail and unreliable, but also because it is easy to fabricate and difficult to check or rebut. It cannot prevail over the positive identification of the accused by eyewitnesses who had no improper motive to testify falsely.154 For the defense of alibi to prosper, the accused must prove not only that he was at some other place at the time of the commission of the crime, but also that it was physically impossible for him to be at the locus delicti or within its immediate vicinity. Physical impossibility refers not only to the geographical distance between the place where the accused was and the place where the crime was committed when the crime transpired, but more importantly, the facility of access between the two places.155 Even granting in arguendo that the accused-appellant had indeed attended a fiesta in Dangcagan, Bukidnon or was hauling com with Equia on the dates of commission of the crime, the same will not easily exonerate him. The accused-appellant failed to adduce clear and convincing evidence that it was physically impossible for him to be at his residence in Cagayan de Oro City at the time of the commission of the crime. Dangcagan, Bukidnon can be traversed by about four or five hours from Cagayan de Oro City, and even less by private vehicle which was available to the accused appellant at any time.156 Thus, it was not physically impossible for him to be at the situs criminis at the dates and times when the two rape incidents were committed. Between the accused-appellant's alibi and denial, and the positive identification and credible testimony of the victim, and her two daughters, the Court must give weight to the latter, especially in the absence of ill motive on their part to falsely testify against the accused-appellant. Conclusion All told, the presumption of innocence endowed an accused-appellant was sufficiently overcome by KKK's clear, straightforward, credible, and truthful declaration that on two separate occasions, he succeeded in having sexual intercourse with her, without her consent and against her will. Evidence of overwhelming force and intimidation to consummate rape is extant from KKK's narration as believably corroborated by the testimonies of MMM and OOO and the physical evidence of KKK's tom panties and short pants. Based thereon, the reason and conscience of the Court is morally certain that the accused-appellant is guilty of raping his wife on the nights of October 16 and 17, 1998. Penalties The Court affirms the penalty of reclusion perpetua, for each count of rape, meted upon the accused-appellant for being in accord with Article 266-A in relation to 266-B of the RPC. Further, he