The unethical thing I understand from both parties is that the drunk guy would already be severely punished from being drunk, Hit and Run, and having a gun.
The offended wants to take the owner of the vehicle to court, even though the offended should have not been driving initial. The offended wouldn’t be going after the person who got hit but a friend is willing to lie and take the owner of the van to court, so this is fraud. The owner of the van can be found negligent of ownership and probably pay for the damage caused to the other car.
The offended unethically lied to the police and wants to take the owner, not the drunk driver, to court. He lied because he was afraid to be carried away to jail for having an suspended license. His friend knew he had a suspended license and lied to the police. Both are accomplishes.
If I were his parents, I would see my child as stealing the car, disobeying the law, having someone else drive my car without my permission and getting it damaged. If you were my child, you’d never have a car in my house again.
Will you lie to your parents and tell them your friend was hit as per-say the police report or tell them you were in the driver’s seat and got hit at the time? If your parents knew you were hit and not your friend and they did not say a word, they would also be considered accomplishes if they agreed know you were the driver initially.
So what is the ethical thing to do?
Take him to court and lie?
Lie to your parents?
Get him for all the owner and driver is worth because fraud is no big deal?
The main issue from what I sense is that you feel obligated to receive compensation for your unfair treatment. If your parents were supportive, they’d be glad you are safe and the car gets repaired.
| 
Linear Mode
