Sad circumstances, for sure, but every legal proceeding has to follow its due course. The Church has established safeguards to protect the Sacrament of Marriage. It’s a difficult process because it’s meant to be so. “Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.”
The fact remains that Sally was previously married, of her own free will. Unfortunately, although it didn’t work out, she is still responsible for her decision. To set up the procedure that you are recommending would lead to abuse of the process. Clergy such as Cardinal Kasper would be handing out annulments with no concern for the facts, and people would go priest shopping to gain the desired outcome. There are unfortunately priests who lack integrity (e.g. my parish priest was a raging pervert who molested so many boys he was eventually laicized). The potential for corruption would be exacerbated if the tribunal process were to be undermined by special exceptions.
But consider well how unjust it is to prevent a person from "second" marriage when the "first" union was a fraud, when he or she really wasn't Sacramentally married to their ex at all. You've got people who never had valid vows nor that one-flesh bond of which the Scripture speaks. Christ Himself says the bond is indestructible "except in the case of porneia" --- and that first attempted marriage was porneia.
"Sally was previously married, of her own free will..."
The State of North Carolina might say that, but the Catholic Church would not say that: because her so-called spouse demonstrated from the very inception of the attempted marriage, that his vows were a fraud. That's the law of the Church: no intention, no vow; no vow, no bond; no bond, no impediment for her present, real and final marriage with a man who really did and does intend what the Church intends.