General Provisions
For offences requiring specific intent/knowledge, a voluntarily intoxicated person is treated as if they had the same knowledge they'd have had sober - unless the intoxicant was given without their knowledge or against their will.
This closes the obvious loophole to Section 23: voluntary intoxication ('I was too drunk to know what I was doing') is generally NOT a valid excuse - the law treats a voluntarily intoxicated offender as if they had their normal, sober awareness for the purpose of intent-based offences.
A person cannot escape liability for a crime requiring specific fraudulent intent simply by claiming they were too drunk to have formed that intent - if the intoxication was voluntary, the law holds them to the same standard as if they were sober.