You absolutely can make an accusation of theft. You can't be suggesting that we all become super sleuth and only ever say anything if we have proof.
This is precisely what I am saying, because an accusation of theft is a very serious matter, and we should all be confident that we can go about our business without fear that someone in the grips of paranoia or prejudice or an irrational and unreasonable belief in the saintliness of our teenage children, or someone who wants to get a promotion or discredit us for some reason would level an accusation of theft against us with no solid evidence, just a 'genuine belief' in our guilt.
The statement, "It's my opinion that that person is a thief," needs to be backed by evidence because it is an accusation of a crime.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion of other people, but there is a difference between opinion and fact. What distinguishes a just accusation from an unjust one is that one is based on fact and the other could be based on literally anything else - any motivation, any prejudice, any irrational feeling.
There are thousands of threads encouraging abused women to speak up even without proof. We don't expect these women to shut up until they have solid evidence.
Women are urged to speak up in order to get help for themselves, yes.
Not necessarily in order to have someone prosecuted, though notifying the police of the crime is of course possible and reasonable and a DV victim is entitled to ask for police help and the help of the criminal and family courts.
We expect authorities and experts to step in.
DV of all kinds can be reported, investigated and prosecuted. It is sometimes very hard to prove, but in theory the accuser has a chance to present suitable evidence to back her case and like it or not, in civilised societies the accused has the chance to offer evidence to clear his name in a court of law.
Most of the time the accused gets off with a rap over the knuckles, but there are other avenues for a victim of DV to protect herself, all provided and supervised by the courts, whose duty it is to make sure that all parties' rights are upheld. Non-molestation orders and residency orders can be issued by the courts who exercise oversight, check that the situation is as the victim says it is, and give a chance to the accused to argue his case. Hearings are held in open court and decisions are a matter of public record.
The beauty of the justice system is the presumption of innocence, and the fact that the law is there to uphold everyone's rights. When you speak of little pieces contributing to a bigger picture you have lost sight of the presumption of innocence, and you also seem to believe and not question that the police are and should be keeping tabs on millions and millions of people.
Theft is a serious allegation. If the OP was so convinced the cleaner was the one who took the gin, why not notify the police? Instead of doing the honest and responsible thing, the OP chose the sly and unjust option of punishing the cleaner without trial, giving her no chance to clear her name - a report to the agency with no evidence, just coincidence to back her account. And then posted about her concern for justice. No, it was revenge, and there is a difference.
Criminals are very good at hiding evidence.
I don't think that is true. Most criminals are pretty stupid. The gin thief who didn't top up the bottle is a prime example of a stupid criminal. The internet is full of other examples.
Belief in the brilliance of criminals is not a justification for making accusations without evidence. A state where people feel they should offer mere opinions of others, not facts but what amounts to personal opinions, or express their opinions of others disguised as facts is well on the road to becoming a police state. In the UK a person officially accused of a crime still has the chance to defend him or herself, to offer the police and courts evidence to refute the accusation. A situation where someone can make a serious accusation without evidence and the accused must bear the burden of that accusation makes a mockery of the law. It's the opposite of what the law stands for.
If nobody ever made a complaint/accusation/enquiry/report without 'evidence' then we would never bring anyone to justice save for the most stupid or unfortunate.
You are advocating a general rush to the phones then. Anyone with an axe to grind, a score to settle - call the police.
And you are conflating an accusation made to an employer with a tip to the police - an accusation made to an employer is one the accused has no chance to defend herself against. Her rights are taken from her and she must live with the burden of the accusation. A tip passed on to the police gives accused and accuser alike the rights afforded to both under the law.
Every thread where someone is being bullied at work where mn encourages them to report and keep a log. Every thread where someone is being harassed by their neighbour but have no evidence.
None of that is the same as accusing someone of a crime, in the dark as it were, with no chance to defend herself.
The work bully may be dealt with by a manager or a HR officer and will have a chance to hear the accusation and defend himself against it.
And sorry, but accusing someone of harassing you when you have no evidence is also called harassing.
Making an accusation of a crime in private against a cleaner, which can never be investigated but which will hang over her is not the same at all as initiating a complaint that will be properly investigated, in due time and with proper procedures designed to guarantee the rights of all parties, with a chance offered to her to defend herself. She must carry the burden of the accusation, the burden of an unsupported opinion that someone else holds of her, with no chance to clear her name. This is unjust.
If the OP is so convinced that this cleaner stole her gin, why not call the police? Theft is a crime, no? Surely if we are interested in justice this is how the world should work?