A man from South Wales who encouraged prank calls falsely claiming there were nail bombs and hostages at a Cardiff hotel has lost his appeal against a jail sentence. The calls led to widespread panic and disruption in the city. Callum Dare, 26, was sentenced to two years and three months in July after admitting to encouraging and boasting about "swatting" incidents. Swatting refers to making false emergency calls to trick law enforcement into responding with a heavy police presence, usually to scare or harass someone. Between 2018 and 2019, Dare ran a dark website where he shared links related to swatting. This included information about a 2016 hoax call in Los Angeles, which claimed there were bombs under chairs at a university, leading to an evacuation. Another false call was made to a journalist in Cardiff, falsely reporting nail bombs and hostages at a hotel in the city center, causing the area to be sealed off. Dare later admitted to encouraging malicious communications and possessing items for fraud, and was sentenced in July. He challenged his sentence at the Court of Appeal, arguing it should have been suspended rather than requiring immediate custody. Three senior judges dismissed Dare’s appeal, stating that the original sentence by Judge Tracey Lloyd-Clarke was appropriate. They emphasized that the judge had considered all relevant factors and that the decision was within her legal authority. Mr Justice Linden, along with Lord Justice Popplewell and Mrs Justice Hill, noted that the judge had taken into account the seriousness of Dare’s actions, including the panic caused in Cardiff and the potential for similar incidents in the U.S. The judges rejected the argument that deterrence was not necessary, stating that the nature of Dare's actions warranted a custodial sentence. Dare was arrested after being identified by a joint investigation involving the FBI and Canadian authorities, with information passed to South Wales Police. Police found on his devices files related to sophisticated phishing fraud, designed to steal personal or payment details from dark web users for fraudsters. Judge Lloyd-Clarke had stated that the severity of Dare’s actions required immediate custody. Dare’s barrister, Peter Donnison, argued that the judge had overemphasized deterrence and that Dare’s personal circumstances, including his autism and ADHD, as well as his lack of prior convictions, should have led to a suspended sentence. However, the judges ruled that the sentence was justified, given the disruption caused and the nature of the offenses.