In 2026, the question of institutional accountability continues to fuel intense debate, particularly regarding the historical link between the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and Jimmy Savile. While official reports focus on administrative processes, a range of critical perspectives and media outlets have questioned Keir Starmer’s leadership during his tenure as Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).
The Core of the Criticism
The primary argument used by critics is one of leadership accountability. While it is verified that Starmer was not the specific “reviewing lawyer” who made the decision to drop the 2009 case, critics—most notably in political circles and certain media outlets—argue that as the head of the organisation, the failure to prosecute a high-profile suspect like Savile ultimately rested on his shoulders.
During a 2022 parliamentary session, then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson famously accused Starmer of “failing to prosecute Jimmy Savile” while “prosecuting journalists.” This sparked a massive national conversation. Although Johnson eventually clarified he was referring to Starmer’s leadership of the organisation rather than personal involvement, the claim is still frequently cited by those who believe the CPS at the time was “soft” on powerful individuals.
Media and Investigative Challenges
Several publications and figures have explored more specific, detrimental angles:
- Lord Ashcroft’s Analysis: In his 2025 book and related articles, Lord Ashcroft questioned how likely it was that Starmer remained “completely oblivious” to an investigation involving one of the most famous men in Britain. Ashcroft points out that the investigation was active for a full year while Starmer was DPP, arguing it is “curious” that such a high-stakes matter would not have been escalated to the very top.
- The “Destroyed” Files: A point of significant contention is that the original CPS files related to the 2009 Savile decision were destroyed in 2010. While the CPS stated this was a standard data retention policy, critics have used this “lack of a paper trail” to suggest a lack of transparency or a deliberate attempt to move past the failure.
- The Levitt Report Critiques: Although Starmer commissioned the Alison Levitt QC review, some observers, including those writing for the Morning Star and Guido Fawkes, have noted that the report granted the specific reviewing lawyer anonymity. This has been framed by some as the “Establishment protecting its own,” with Starmer as the face of that system.
The Scope of the Investigations
The 2009 file submitted to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) was the culmination of work that began in 2007. It involved allegations from four separate complainants across two police forces:
- Surrey Police: Investigated three allegations. Two involved former pupils at Duncroft Approved School in the late 1970s, and one involved an incident at Stoke Mandeville Hospital in approximately 1973.
- Sussex Police: Investigated one allegation involving an indecent assault on an adult woman in 1970.
Surrey Police spent over a year attempting to “build” a case, which included contacting former pupils of Duncroft School to find corroborating witnesses. Despite these efforts, the investigation faced a critical hurdle: by the time the file reached the CPS in October 2009, none of the four complainants were prepared to support a prosecution or testify in court.
The October 2009 Interview
A key moment in the investigation occurred in October 2009 when Savile was interviewed under caution by Surrey Police. This was a rare instance in which Savile was directly confronted by law enforcement. During the interview, he denied all wrongdoing.
Because the victims had withdrawn their support for a trial, the police did not arrest him. The CPS reviewing lawyer, based in the South East office, concluded that without victim testimony or forensic evidence, there was “no realistic prospect of conviction.” The case was officially dropped on October 26, 2009.+1
Critical Failures Identified in Post-Mortem Reviews
Following Savile’s death, the Levitt Report (2013) and the HMIC “Mistakes Were Made” Report identified several systemic failures in how these investigations were handled:
- Lack of Information Sharing: The police did not tell the victims that others had also come forward. The Levitt Report later found that at least three of the women would have supported a prosecution if they had known they were not alone.
- “Frightened Off”: An Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) review into the Sussex allegation found that the victim felt “frightened off” by officers who warned her that Savile’s high-powered lawyers would “ridicule” her in court.
- Caution vs. Proactivity: The reports concluded that both the police and the CPS treated the allegations with a degree of “caution” that was unjustified, effectively failing to “build” a prosecution by proactively seeking out more of the hundreds of victims who have since come forward.
These failures are what led Keir Starmer, as Director of Public Prosecutions, to issue a formal apology in 2013. He admitted that the “shortcomings” represented a failure of the system to properly support vulnerable victims against a high-profile suspect.
Reforms and Policy Shifts Post-Savile
Following Savile’s death and the subsequent public revelations, Starmer commissioned an independent review and issued a formal apology in 2013 for the “shortcomings” of the CPS. He used the failure as a “watershed moment” to implement fundamental changes to how the UK justice system handles sexual assault:
- Focus on Allegation Credibility: Starmer introduced new guidelines that shift the focus from a witness’s “perceived weakness” to the credibility of the allegation itself. This was designed to counter “victim-blaming” myths, such as a victim’s delay in reporting or their use of alcohol.
- Information Sharing: New protocols were established to ensure that the police and CPS proactively look for links between “one-off” cases and share information across different agencies, such as schools and social services.
- Victims’ Right to Review: In 2013, he launched a policy giving victims the legal right to challenge a CPS decision not to charge a suspect, providing a formal mechanism to prevent cases from being dropped without proper oversight.
- National Review Panel: He proposed a national panel to review historic sexual abuse complaints that were not pursued in the past, ensuring that “another Savile moment” would be prevented through continuous scrutiny.
Public Perception
The impact of these reports is visible in public polling. A YouGov survey indicated that more than 20% of Britons believed the claims about Starmer’s responsibility were “probably true,” suggesting that the “expose” style of reporting has had a lasting effect on public trust, regardless of official “objective” findings.
If you or anyone you know has been affected by the individuals highlighted on this website, please report them to the Police on 101 (999 in an emergency) or visit their online resources for further details on reporting a crime. You can also report to Crimestoppers if you wish to remain completely anonymous. There is help available on our support links page.