Being aware of the panelist in question, and the incident which precipitated the situation in question, I understand why the panelist said what she said. Unfortunately (for her, and for people who support her), she basically sank to the level of the harassers. Essentially, she handed them a win.
I get it. It’s exceptionally hard to maintain the high-ground in the face of people who have made life and livelihood so difficult, but it is important to avoid using the same tactics the harassers and bullies use. For one thing, it has no effect on them; they’re naturally immune to it. For another, the discourse becomes muddied, and victims are seen (especially by those sympathetic to the abusers) as the aggressors.
I agree with Hank, there were mitigating factors to this particular incident that would’ve made applying the ban-hammer an inappropriate response. I just hope the panelist in question can take what happened, learn from it, and formulate some responses which let her maintain the high ground.