For your point #4, I don't think the prosecutors were specifically trying to go after another _hacking_ conviction (to expand the statutes), but they were reaching for any law that could apply, since what the woman did (emotionally harassing a minor until driving her to suicide [allegedly]) was considered to be abhorrent but not in itself illegal -- just like the prosecutor's conduct with Arron. And in our society, any time something tragic happens people feel that someone has to be held accountable.
Problem is, once a law is used for a new use, no matter how virtuous it is, it will now be seen as one of the tools in the toolbox for prosecutors to punish people. Many of those new uses will not be looked on favorably, either.
There would be significant fallout from setting a precedent that violation of a website's Terms of Service constituted a Federal crime with punishment up to 35 years in prison, no matter how much we dislike the person being prosecuted.
