A Blackpool TikToker made a false 999 call to the emergency services to generate social media content.
Kian King, 19, of St Chad's Road, Blackpool, admitted an offence of wasting police time when he appeared in custody at Lancaster Magistrates' Court on Wednesday, 14th January 2026.
Under section 5(2) of the Criminal Law Act 1967 a person commits an offence if they cause the wasteful employment of the police by knowingly making to any person a false report - either orally or in writing - tending to:
- show that an offence has been committed; or,
- give rise to apprehension for the safety of any persons or property; or,
- show that he has information material to any police inquiry.
The maximum sentence on summary conviction is 26 weeks' custody and/or a fine at level 4 (currently £2,500).
King was arrested on The Promenade, Blackpool, as dozens of blue light workers responded to a report that a person was in difficulty in the sea.
Lancashire Police released a statement about the false report: "We were called to The Promenade at 2.33am yesterday (13th January 2026) following a report of a concern for welfare of an individual who had got into difficulty in the sea.
"After around 90 minutes of searching, it transpired this was a hoax call thought to have been linked to an attempt to boost engagement on a social media account."
Two lifeboats were deployed on the red herring.
King was remanded in custody until his next hearing, which is interesting in its own right given the summary nature of the offence.
He will be sentenced at Preston Magistrates' Court on Wednesday, 18th February 2026.
Update (16/1/26): I should clarify that wasting police time is imprisonable, despite my initial comment that it wasn't. Article now corrected.
5 comments:
Outrageous to remand him in custody for a non-imprisonable, summary only offence, with no bail hearing for 3 weeks. Why? Just why? He cannot be imprisoned for the offence, so the process is truly a greater punishment than any sentence. Unlike many sex offenders and p3dophiles, who often get bail between admitting guilt/being found guilty and sentencing.
So the court has given him a prison sentence "by proxy", shall we say? Being remanded in custody for any period of time is a de facto prison sentence. By default, magistrates and district judges don't remand defendants for non-imprisonable offences. I get the impression that in this case, the police/prosecution applied for a remand pending sentence. Would be interesting to know why exactly he has been remanded.
Thanks for your comments - I'm guessing you left both. He will have another bail hearing, at which he can make an application for reconsideration, within 8 days.
There are several perfectly legal reasons why a person convicted of a summary, non-imprisonable offence can be remanded in custody. I would not want to speculate on which might apply in this case.
Just seen your correction. I eat my words too. So he can be imprisoned, but only for a maximum of 6 months.
Yes, I was having a bit of a brain fart. In the original article I said it was punishable by 26 weeks' custody at the top, then for some inexplicable reason followed up with the non-imprisonable comment.
Post a Comment