I think there are two important things to remember. The first is that law societies exist solely for the purpose of regulating the profession in the public's interest. I believe, from what I see, that they take that responsibility very seriously. They would feel that they have no option but to proceed.
They also have a lower burden of proof. The standard of proof in a law society prosecution does not have to meet the threshold of “beyond a reasonable doubt”. It's not a criminal prosecution. I know that when law enforcement and provincial and federal prosecutors are looking at issues, they look at the likelihood of conviction. The fact that there is a higher standard of proof to be met is sometimes a reason not to proceed with a case.