In this event, the coordinator should prompt the chain analysis company for proof as to how they are certain these funds are owned by the accused
Still, central point of failure.
I would imagine if the paid company is going to accept liability, then I assume that would prevent the coordinator from circumventing their decisions.
Even if they are held accountable, it's still a central point of failure, which can make wrong assumptions, assertions, decisions. Treating each coin equally eliminates this drawback.
No, it's not a solution to your specific problem, the solution to your specific problem is to simply use a different WabiSabi coordinator
Here comes the question: why would I use software whose developers completely go oppositely to my Bitcoin ideals, with much worse feature (minimum liquidity), at the very moment where developers with better intentions to my ideals work on building Bitcoin mixing without arbitrary ethic borders?
I think that's why Lightning is so important
I think that's why decentralized exchanges are important, not lightning per se.