A review into a police force’s contacts with Jimmy Savile has concluded that there is no evidence its officers protected him from arrest or prosecution.

The West Yorkshire Police (WYP) report examined the history of Savile’s relationship with the force, including reports that officers attended his well-known Friday Morning Club at his Leeds flat.

All inquiries have shown that Savile was able to hide his offending from those he came into contact with and who probably thought that they knew him well

The report concluded: “There is no evidence that he was protected from arrest or prosecution for any offences as a result of his relationship with WYP, or individual friendships with officers.”

The report said 68 of Savile’s victims have now come forward in the force area.

The report said: “No evidence has been found to conclude that there was any impropriety or misconduct in relation to the Friday Morning Club.

“Savile had friends who were police officers, but he also had friends that were solicitors, doctors and many other professions.

“All inquiries have shown that Savile was able to hide his offending from those he came into contact with and who probably thought that they knew him well.”

The report also examined the way in which WYP used Savile’s celebrity status to front a range of campaigns and appeals.

It stressed that at the time he was “seen by most of the public as a man who did good work”.

But it concluded: “The review team have concerns regarding the absence of a process to secure Savile’s services for some of these events and also the over-reliance on personal friendships that developed between Savile and some officers over a number of years to secure that support.”

The report said it was “of greater concern” that the force continued to use Savile as part of crime prevention campaigns even after it received a request from Surrey Police in 2007 to check what records were held on the broadcaster as part of its investigation into Duncroft School.

In June 2009, Surrey Police wrote to Savile asking that he make contact and it is documented that WYP offered officer support if that interview was to be in West Yorkshire.

The report said an inspector from WYP – Inspector A – contacted Surrey Police control on behalf of Savile because the deejay had lost the investigating officer’s contact details.

During that conversation, Inspector A said he was a personal friend of Savile and also that “Jimmy gets so many of these type of complaints”.

Inspector A provided a contact number to Surrey Police for Savile. The report said: “This was done by Inspector A on WYP recorded communications systems but due to the passage of time, the recording has now been destroyed in line with force policy at that time.”

The report said the investigation “conducted extensive inquiries to establish if any allegation of sexual abuse by Savile had been reported to WYP during his lifetime”.

It said: “Although rumours did exist of previous investigations taking place into allegations made against Savile, when these were explored they were found to be without any foundation.”

Despite numerous interviews, system searches and inquiries with other agencies, the review team found no evidence of any previous allegations being made to WYP against Savile, or of any investigations being conducted.

“The force does recognise that some people may have difficulty in reconciling this fact; indeed WYP has difficulty in reconciling this, as since October 2012, 68 victims have come forward to report Savile’s abuse in the West Yorkshire area.”

The report said none of the victims currently identified had previously reported their abuse to WYP. The review also examined suggestions Savile was a “person of interest” in the Yorkshire Ripper inquiry in the 1970s. It found that many records have been destroyed but they had found thousands of record cards with information about men who had been spoken to.

The report said: “They contain scant information and do not indicate whether Savile was a ‘person of interest’ to the inquiry team.

“The information held was his name, date of birth, home address and various reference numbers. It was not possible to establish the relevance of the reference numbers as a large proportion of the investigation paperwork had been destroyed in the 1980s.”

But the review said: “One card does make reference to Savile offering his services as an intermediary for the police, should the ‘Ripper’ wish to make contact.”

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.