A “person shall not be excused from criminal liability except upon proof that at the time of committing the alleged criminal act the person was laboring under such a defect of reason . . . as not to know the nature of the act, or that it was wrong.”
The gist of my friend’s argument was that, using the aforementioned DWI case, if the driver blows a 0.08 or higher, she’s guilty. Why defend her. There is proof of her guilt, and she should suffer the consequences.