Can a defendant charged with murder introduce evidence of voluntary intoxication to demonstrate the absence of either express or implied malice?

Allowing a defendant charged with murder to introduce evidence of voluntary intoxication to demonstrate the absence of either express or implied malice would not result in an acquittal, but in reduction of the offense to involuntary or vehicular manslaughter, which involve the unlawful killing of a human being without malice. ( 192; see People v. Saille, supra, 54 Cal.3d 1103, 1114, 2 Cal.Rptr.2d 364, 820 P.2d 588.) Thus, we conclude that section 22 was not intended, in murder prosecutions, to preclude consideration of evidence of voluntary intoxication on the issue whether a defendant harbored malice aforethought, whether the prosecution proceeds on a theory that malice was express or implied.