You are not culpable for your actions unless you intended to commit them. The law has evolved to include numerous definitions for “intent” and how it is treated. Typically, you need an overt action that leads to the criminal behavior. Under this standard, the government willpresume intent if you choose to drink and drive and eventually hit and kill someone. Even though you were drunk and thus your reasoning was impaired, you choose to drink in the first place and to drive. Thus, the intent was present.
A woman tested this theory by claiming that her drink at was spiked when she ordered it at a fast food establishment. She argued that her drink was spiked and her drugged state is what induced her to commit these crimes, including homicide. Unfortunately, proving these claims is difficult because toxins remain in the body for a limited period. She must have the test performed shortly after her arrest to ensure that evidence is gathered to substantiate her claims.
She also faces another hurdle which is that involuntary drunkenness is not an excuse for homicide. Involuntary actions can be an excuse for many crimes, but it is never applied to the death of another person. So, while this argument may work on larceny, it does not work for the subsequent vehicular homicide she committed.
If you are facing DWI charges and you believe that you were involuntarily drugged, you should contact a lawyer as soon as possible. As stated above, there is a limited window to collect this evidence. If you were tested after the crash, there are precious few hours to collect blood samples to substantiate your claims. An attorney can help you gather evidence and prepare a defense to ensure that your story is given equal credence with the arresting officer’s version.
