Here’s an ethical issue and Jewish source response:

Case

A man was using a bulldozer to stockpile gravel.  He took a break and left the cab unlocked and the key in the ignition.  When he returned, the bulldozer was missing. He discovered that while he was gone the bulldozer had been set in motion and had crashed into the side of someone’s house.  The person whose house had been damaged filed suit against the operator who had left the keys in the bulldozer and asked that he pay for the destruction done to the home.  

Who should pay to fix the house when we can’t find the person who actually drove the bulldozer into it? 

Answer

In American law it is called “an attractive nuisance.”  In Hebrew we call it “the case of the pit.”  It comes from the Torah.  The Torah, Exodus 21:33-34, says,: “If one person digs a pit and does not cover it and an ox or donkey falls into it, the one who opened the pit is responsible for paying for the damage.”

In the Talmud the rabbis make it clear that anytime you leave something that could cause damage and you do not protect people from it, you are responsible for the damages.  In this case, leaving the key in the bulldozer was like leaving the pit uncovered.  Therefore, even though he was not driving, the driver needs to accept responsibility.

Joel Grishaver, “You Be the Judge 3”, pgs. 57-58

Used with permission from Joel Grishaver