Lack of clarity
Knowing some minimal details about what he did would be useful. The CMA seems to be loose enough that if someone were to access pictures via someone's profile that have privacy set to public without the express permission of the owner and makes/retains a copy that it could be argued that was illegal under the CMA at the lowest level "unauthorised access to a computer". OTOH if the court has established that he actively hacked the accounts to get private images that's pretty much business as usual. Not that this sets a precedent either way since it's a hearing in a Magistrates' Court.