http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27007764

While he raises a lot of worthwhile and serious points, he's the one who repeatedly put himself in dodgy situations.

but it seems the dodgy situations were not illegal
i will refer to the enquiry about police corruption

it seems that they (the police and cps) will require pay back

as he won the case all his costs should be award back to him ...

Found illegal or not, people with little to gain and more to lose went before a court because he crudely targeted them both in public places and Westminster. He was repeatedly warned about his behaviour by senior Conservative Party figures if nothing else, so I've absolutely no sympathy for him when he wound up in court for alleged behaviour four years after the warnings.

i have no sympathy for him, but he won the case
all costs should be awarded ...

Indeed. Had those charges been levelled at you or I, I expect that finding the £130,000 defence would be very tricky, and having won*, you'd still be severely out of pocket.

*Let's assume for a moment that your chances of winning were dependent on the abilities of your legal team, not the veracity of your argument. In other words, paying less than £130,000 may well have reduced your chances of winning.

i agree with everything you have stated, but it will not change the outcome, he won the case
as such he should be reimbursed all costs, regardless, if i like that fact or not. is not the issue ...

Shock 1: MSR takes a liberal stance

Shock 2: I just agreed with MSR

Being serious though, the simple ideal stands that nobody, having won a court case, should be left out of pocket.