Page "M'Naghten rules" Paragraph 34

In DPP v Harper ( 1997 ) it was held that insanity is not generally a defence to strict liability offences.

In this instance, the accused was driving with excess alcohol.

By definition, the accused is sufficiently aware of the nature of the activity to commit the actus reus of driving and presumably knows that driving while drunk is legally wrong.

Any other feature of the accused's knowledge is irrelevant.