Interestingly, "a consistent progression from data collection (perceiving function) to court judgment (judging functions)" is pretty much the ideal or the "gold standard" to which one should aspire.
PersonalityPage.com takes each personality type in isolation and provides instructions on how to strengthen the Auxiliary and achieve better balance in life. And in each case the instructions boil down to pretty much the same thing: "Learn how to temporarily suspend your judging function and allow your perceiving function to do its work first."
Thus, the personality types with a Dominant perceiving function (Dominant Ne/Se--ESTP, ESFP, ENFP, ENTP; and Dominant Ni/Si--ISTJ, ISFJ, INFJ, INTJ) commit the error of hijacking their weak courtroom and using it to restrict the flow of input into the police station. PersonalityPage.com says they need to stop using the courtroom in that manner; they need to put the courtroom aside temporarily and then apply it in full force only after the police station has done its work.
And the personality types with a Dominant judging function (Dominant Fi/Ti--ISTP, ISFP, INFP, INTP; and Dominant Fe/Te--ESTJ, ESFJ, ENFJ, ENTJ) have such strong courtrooms that they simply forget to use their police station or they hijack the police station and use it to repel the outside world altogether. PersonalityPage.com says they need to learn how to suspend the action of the courtroom entirely at the first stage and put the police station to work in the proper manner as the correct first step.
So in a way the correct order of progression from police station to courtroom is very much at the center of what constitutes balance or imbalance in the functions. It seems that the courtroom function is the more "active" of the two functions in terms of setting limits and moving things along. So mastering proper use of the courtroom function (and putting it in its proper place in the progression) appears to be at the center of any corrective procedures (as I interpret the material at PersonalityPage.com, anyway).
But that's a tangent. Any question of identifying and correcting imbalances comes later in the game. Concerning the beginning of my earlier post, I agree with your point: I need to qualify my early description so that it doesn't imply a consistent progression from police station to courtroom in the typical, everyday use of those functions.