Tough to be the SC in this one

So is "we will punish this person whether or not they did anything materially wrong, because if we don't and it turns out they did do/commit something actionable after all, we'll look bad".

And so is "we will punish this person because somebody is (or just might be) uncomfortable with what they do / did and we're afraid of the huge stink said somebody threatens to raise / is raising / might possibly raise on Asocial Media, even though there is/was no rule against it / it happened between mostly-consenting participants / take-your-pick".

Yes, handling such cases is No Fun. For anybody. But that doesn't absolve you from being taken to task for doing it badly and, worse, not even seeing the problem. I mean, Mr. Peters apparently didn't see the problem either, so there's some parity there, but Peters has significantly less power over the SC than vice versa.