Final answer:
True. Susan can claim involuntary intoxication as a defense if she was drugged without her knowledge, but the success of this defense varies by jurisdiction. The fragility of memory, as researched by Elizabeth Loftus, may also play a part in her defense.
Step-by-step explanation:
True. The scenario described involves the concept of involuntary intoxication as a potential defense in criminal law. If Susan was drugged without her knowledge and therefore lacked the capacity to form the specific intent to commit a crime, it could serve as a defense. Involuntary intoxication can in some jurisdictions be used as an exculpatory defense when it prevents the defendant from understanding the nature and quality of the act, or from distinguishing right from wrong at the time of the offense. However, the success of this defense depends on the specific legal standards of the jurisdiction where the crime took place. Moreover, Elizabeth Loftus's research on memory suggests that memory can be fragile and prone to distortion through suggestibility or other factors such as being under the influence of mind-altering substances, which could affect the reliability of Susan's recollection and perceptions during the crime. This aspect of memory fragility could potentially be relevant in assessing her criminal responsibility.