Thank you for your question, Mr. Fortin.
We’re talking about self-induced intoxication. If another person is proven to be the cause of the intoxication, that could be a defence. Everything depends on the facts, and that does indeed raise another issue.
However, given that the person should have known, under the circumstances, that there was a risk, it would be much more difficult for them to prove their innocence. I am not talking here about the way the joint was made or the source of the intoxication, regardless of what it was. It’s the context that will determine it. Jurisprudence contains specific standards to reinforce the message that self-induced intoxication is not a defence and exceptions are rare.