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

Answer choice A does seem to contradict the conclusion of the argument, and I am struggling to figure out why this answer choice is incorrect. The whole point of the argument is to say that both people should have been charged with the same high degree of severity, regardless of the specific circumstances of the incidents. The author clearly does not think justice would have been better served if Peter Foster was let off with a warning, because the final sentence reads "Therefore Alicia should also have been charged with automobile theft." The argument is geared toward stricter punishment for the crime of taking someone else's car without asking permission. It seems all of the details in the body of the stimulus are extraneous - what the author is trying to prove is that the act of taking a care without permission is punishable by a charge of automobile theft...it would not make sense to say the author all of a sudden thinks Peter should be let off easy. Perhaps I am just not grasping the concept of cannot be true questions, because a lot of these are really confusing to me...they don't seem to make sense logically! :-<