I presume you mean a fine. If this is a first offense, no violence or threats were involved and the perpetrator seems contrite and unlikely to steal again, that amount seems reasonable to me.
The ONLY thing necessary for law enforcement to charge an individual with a crime, is "reasonable cause to believe" that the suspect committed it.
Of course. The punishment for a crime needs to stop people from committing the crime. If the charge for stealing a multi-thousand dollar crime was just a $200 fine, no potential criminal would think twice about it.
Property crime enhancement in a legal system is when the perpetrator due to certain actions, previous record or seriousness of the crime can be charged with a stipulated charge that increases the dollar threshold for the crime, the length of the sentence or a higher penalty.
Reasonable suspicion
No. Suspicion is grounds or a hunch in which someone believes another person commited a crime. A conviction means that the state has proven beyond reasonable doubt, or the Defendant pled guilty or no contest to a charge, that the crime was committed.
If the charge is related to the same crime but a different offense, yes, they can.
... may or may not be convicted of the crime ... At least in the USA... On the other hand if there is reasonable doubt that a person is guilty of a crime, he or she is supposed to be acquitted (which is not the same as declared innocent).
Probably not. In order to charge someone with an offense - Police need reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed. Hearsay does not fall under reasonable suspicion nor do hunches. They need evidence to support their allegations to obtain an arrest warrant or an indictment.
You cant and that would be a crime!
It makes the crime a worse charge.
You can't charge anyone with a crime. You should refer the facts to the local prosecutor and allow them to worry about the details.
you don't do the crime!