Interesting perspective.
First of all, even if you believe that both sides (the old witnesses and Justin) committed mistakes, I think the majority of people would agree that Justin getting the exchanges to vote was order of magnitudes much more serious and dangerous. It sets very very dangerous precedent for the entire blockchain and crypto community.
Secondly, you state "They did it because they feared what Justin might do, and that was wrong." If a completely unknown person had bought the stake, then it might make sense for the witnesses to give that person the benefit of the doubt and see what they did first. But Justin has a well documented history of being a bad actor interested in exercising centralized control. For example, take a look at:
https://www.ccn.com/why-is-justin-sun-lying-to-tron-holders-follow-the-money/
(which shows Justin colluding with Binance on Tron matters)
There was also an article (can't find the link) about how on Tron blockchain, Justin had 2 super representatives (or witness equivalent) ousted who disagreed with a fork he wanted implemented. I'm not a Tron expert so I might have some of the details wrong on this issue.
These articles demonstrate a pattern of behavior and I think it was entirely reasonable for the witnesses (and anyone else) to conclude that this is Justin's modus operandi. I think it would be incredibly naive to automatically give him a blank slate and leave the community and blockchain vulnerable to the types of aggressive actions he has done before.
RE: The Great Steem-Tron Debate - How To Move On - A Plea To Both Sides