A serial killer’s complaint that a regional news website wrongly reported he had confessed to other unsolved murders has been rejected by the press watchdog.

Levi Bellfield, left, complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation after Get Surrey reported he was “feared to have lied about having other victims simply to hurt families grieving over unsolved cases.”

Bellfield, now known as Yusuf Rahim, is currently serving life for the murders of Marsha McDonnell, Amelie Delagrange and Milly Dowler.

Get Surrey had also reported a statement from the police saying that there was no evidence to link him to any case for which he had not already been convicted, and said that “the ‘confessions’ came to light as Surrey Police interviewed Bellfield at Wakefield Prison over fears an accomplice assisted him in the abduction of Milly in 2002″.

Bellfield’s brother Richard Turner complained to IPSO on his behalf that Get Surrey breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice, stating that he had never confessed to other murders.

Mr Turner provided press releases from the Metropolitan Police on the “alleged involvement of Levi Bellfield” in a number of serious crimes, but said that none of these releases said that Mr Bellfield had confessed to these crimes.

Get Surrey said that the article was primarily based on a press release from the Metropolitan Police which said that investigations into Mr Bellfield’s involvement in other serious crimes had been closed, adding the allegation that Bellfield may have confessed to other crimes was based on information reported by The Times in January 2016, and on information provided by Surrey and Metropolitan Police at the same time.

Its reporter contacted the Surrey police press office at that time, and asked specifically if Mr Bellfield had admitted to other murders.

He was told that Bellfield had made a “number of admissions”, and then contacted the Metropolitan Police which provided a statement saying that it was “liaising with a number of other UK police forces in relation to information which has been passed onto us regarding a number of criminal investigations”.

Get Surrey also highlighted a number of other articles which reported the “confessions”, and said it was satisfied the information was accurate on the basis this had gone unchallenged, adding that Bellfield was not contacted prior to publication as he was in prison at the time, and said that no attempt was made to contact Mr Bellfield’s legal representative.

Nonetheless, it said that it was happy to mark its internal content system with a message to make staff aware of the complaint.

The complaint was not upheld, and the full adjudication can be read here.