When Alicia Green borrowed a neighbor's car without permission, the police merely gave her a warning. However, when P...

In a discussion post for question 1, Mehran broke down each part of the passage into the unnecessary background information, conclusion, premise, and subsidiary conclusion. I found that super helpful and I was wondering if it could be done for this question as well? "When Alicia Green borrowed a neighbor's car without permission, the police merely gave her a warning" "However, when Peter Foster did the same thing, he was charged with automobile theft" "Peter came to the attention of the police because the car he was driving was hit by a speeding taxi" "Alicia was stopped because the car she was driving had defective taillights" "It is true that the car Peter took got damaged and the car Alicia took did not, but since it was the taxi that caused the damage this difference was not due to any difference in the blameworthiness of their behavior." "Therefore Alicia should also have been charged with automobile theft" (Conclusion?) I can't even tell what the premise is here.