Why don't we all just work on this one new rule I am making at SL.
Rule #1: Compromise...
Or... What? You going to throw out dissenters?
... Without trying to sound overly dramatic, what you're basically saying is if someone does a "bad", you're not going to ask why they did it, much less if it really was like is being claimed. You won't even try, you will just go 'you did a bad, so gtfo, close the door on your way out'.
Where's the justice in that exactly? There is none...
A rule that does not have a provision for emergency situations is a rule that would be doomed to fail to begin with (hence why we had grace periods and other such stuff for the biju rules).
That aside though, it's the Les Miserables problem. If you steal, you steal, you broke the law. Your punishment may vary depending on what you stole and all that such nonsense, but there is no question that you broke the law. Here on SL, that has been the hardest part to get past: is it a violation of the rules or not? Is it metagaming or deceptive RP?
There is no justice in a rule/law that can be broken by a chosen few and not broken by others if the reason for the exception is not given in the rule/law. There is no justice in the rich getting away with highway robbery and the poor spending their life in chains for the same offense, no matter whether it was more noble or not.
There is a reason that there is a judicial distinction (in many places) between degrees of murder and manslaughter. Heck, you can get off scot free in some places if it was self-defense. These are put into the rules for a reason; because if all murderers were hurled in jail, then a man defending his home from a burglar is considered just as wrong as a man killing his wife for ownership of the home. And for the society that put the rules in place, that is not justifiable by their idea of morality.
Your idea of justice seems different than mine. In an ideal system, everyone should be equal under the law, regardless of fame, fortune, experience, or friends in low and high places. That's my idea of justice. That you can't get away with cold-blooded murder (again, defined by the society) just because you have enough money to throw at the courts. That you can't get away with breaking and bending the rules just because you're considered "good".
I don't want to derail into philosophy here. If the purpose of this is just to try to shoehorn a bunch of people who will still be bound by their own individual rules and not by some common law of the land (figuratively speaking), then by all means, go on ahead, you might as well stick with the system we have already in that case.