Final answer:
The alibi defense does not relate to a defendant's capacity to comprehend his or her actions, but rather provides evidence that the accused was elsewhere when the crime occurred.
Step-by-step explanation:
The defense that does not relate to a defendant's capacity to comprehend his or her actions is the alibi defense. An alibi defense involves a defendant providing evidence that they were somewhere else at the time the crime was committed, thus could not have been involved in the commission of the crime. This contrasts with the insanity defense, where the argument is that due to a mental disorder, the defendant was unable to understand the nature or wrongfulness of their actions.
Similarly, the duress defense suggests that the defendant was forced to commit the crime due to immediate threat of harm, and the intoxication defense may argue that the defendant's capacity to understand or control their actions was impaired by substances. However, providing an alibi merely demonstrates the impossibility of the accused being the perpetrator, without touching on their mental state or capacity for comprehension.