10. Presumption of sanity. Every person is presumed to be of sound mind, and to have been of sound mind at any time which comes in question, until the contrary is proved. 11. Insanity. A person is not criminally responsible for an act or omission if at the time of doing the act or making the omission he or she is through any disease affecting his or her mind incapable of understanding what he or she is doing or of knowing that he or she ought not to do the act or make the omission; but a person may be criminally responsible for an act or omission, although his or her mind is affected by disease, if that disease does not in fact produce upon his or her mind one or other of the effects mentioned in this section in reference to that act or omission. 12. Intoxication. (1) Except as provided in this section, intoxication shall not constitute a defence to any criminal charge. (2) Intoxication shall be a defence to any criminal charge if by reason of the intoxication the person charged at the time of the act or omission complained of did not know that the act or omission was wrong or did not know what he or she was doing and— (a) the state of intoxication was caused without his or her consent by the malicious or negligent act of another person; or (b) the person charged was by reason of intoxication insane, temporarily or otherwise, at the time of such act or omission. (3) Where the defence under subsection (2) is established, then in a case falling under subsection (2)(a) the accused person shall be discharged; and in a case falling under subsection (2)(b), the provisions of the Magistrates Court Act relating to insanity shall apply. (4) Intoxication shall be taken into account for the purpose of determining whether the person charged had formed any intention, specific or otherwise, in the absence of which he or she would not be guilty of the offence. (5) For the purposes of this section, “intoxication” shall be deemed