Questions: If a prosecutor knows that Sam is a violent criminal but the only evidence against Sam is the complainant's accusation, should the prosecutor charge Sam?

The answer is: No, there is not enough evidence to charge Sam.

While the prosecutor's intention to protect the public is understandable, the legal system requires sufficient evidence to charge someone with a crime. Charging someone based solely on their past behavior without concrete evidence related to the current accusation undermines the principles of justice and due process.

A criminal record can sometimes be used in court to establish a pattern of behavior, but it cannot be the sole basis for a new charge. The current accusation must be supported by evidence specific to the alleged incident. Without such evidence, charging Sam would be legally unjustifiable.

This option is problematic because it assumes guilt based on an accusation alone, which contradicts the principle of "innocent until proven guilty." Accusations must be substantiated with evidence before legal action can be taken.

This is the correct answer. The legal system requires sufficient evidence to support a charge. An accusation alone, without corroborating evidence, is not enough to meet the burden of proof required to charge someone with a crime. This ensures that individuals are not wrongfully prosecuted based on unverified claims.