On 26 June 2026, emergency services attended an incident outside Jaynes Baby Bank in Pontypool following reports of a fire in the alleyway behind the premises and a subsequent physical altercation. The incident quickly became the subject of widespread discussion on social media, with witnesses, photographs and statements emerging within hours. Both principal parties later published differing accounts of what had happened. This report brings together the available material in chronological order and distinguishes between established facts, public statements and allegations.
What We Know
Based on the material reviewed, the following points are not materially disputed:
- A fire occurred in the alleyway between Peacocks and the nearby chip shop.
- Members of the public attempted to extinguish the fire before emergency services arrived.
- A physical altercation took place between Carrie-Anne Ridsdale and Abby Franklyn.
- Police and the fire service attended the scene.
- Carrie-Anne Ridsdale sustained visible facial injuries.
- Photographs of the aftermath were published online shortly afterwards.
The Fire
Witnesses reported seeing smoke coming from the alleyway behind the premises during the early afternoon. Abby Franklyn later stated that she was shopping with her grandmother when they noticed smoke coming from the alleyway. According to Abby, she and a member of staff from Peacocks extinguished the fire using bottles of water after becoming concerned that it posed a risk to nearby buildings. Carrie-Anne Ridsdale disputes this account and, in Facebook posts published after the incident, alleged that Abby Franklyn had started the fire before entering the premises accusing her of causing it. At the time of writing, no official findings regarding the origin of the fire have been published.
The Confrontation
According to Abby Franklyn’s public account, she was shopping in Pontypool with her grandmother when they noticed smoke coming from the alleyway. Abby alleges that Carrie-Anne began shouting at and verbally abusing her elderly grandmother. Abby states she stepped between them before Carrie-Anne slapped her across the face, resulting in the altercation that followed.
“She slapped me so I right hooked her…”
Carrie-Anne Ridsdale disputes Abby’s account. In Facebook posts published after the incident, Carrie alleges that Abby was responsible for starting the fire before entering the premises accusing her of causing it and later assaulting her.
The Altercation
Both parties accept that a physical altercation occurred, but their accounts differ significantly. Abby Franklyn maintains she acted in self-defence after being slapped. Carrie-Anne Ridsdale maintains that she was assaulted following the confrontation over the fire. Numerous members of the public later commented that they had witnessed all or part of the incident, while others referred to mobile phone footage and CCTV which they believed supported one version of events. At the time of writing, neither Abby’s mobile phone footage nor the private CCTV footage referred to publicly has been released in full.
Photographs published shortly afterwards show Carrie-Anne Ridsdale with a visible injury to her forehead. The images confirm that an injury was sustained but do not, by themselves, establish how it occurred or who was legally responsible.
Police Attendance
Multiple police officers attended the incident alongside the fire service. According to Abby Franklyn, she was initially handcuffed before officers reviewed the mobile phone footage she had recorded and spoke with witnesses. Abby states that she was subsequently released. No official police statement has been released confirming the circumstances surrounding those decisions.
Message Received During the Incident
Police everywhere.
One woman has been detained shouting that Carrie hit her first.
Carrie has locked herself inside the shop.
This message was received whilst the incident was unfolding and forms part of the contemporaneous chronology reviewed for this report.
Subsequent Update from Abby Franklyn
Following the incident, Abby Franklyn published a further statement providing additional detail about her interaction with police.
“I’ve also just found out that after I was put in the riot van officers shouted up, ‘We have arrested the wrong one,’ and said they saw the videos where I was in self defence and released me, making it known I was not being charged. I’m not sure whether she was arrested and then taken to the hospital. I have no idea.”
These comments are Abby Franklyn’s account of events and have not been independently verified. No official statement has been released by the police confirming the circumstances surrounding her detention, release or whether any subsequent arrests were made.
Carrie-Anne Ridsdale’s Account
Following the incident, Carrie-Anne published a series of Facebook posts disputing the version of events circulating online. Among her principal claims were:
- Abby Franklyn started the fire.
- Private CCTV supports her version of events.
- She was assaulted whilst on the ground.
- She sustained a head injury requiring hospital treatment.
- She was dissatisfied with aspects of the police response.
Notably, allegations that Abby had previously threatened to petrol bomb the premises first appeared in Facebook posts published after the incident. Based on the material reviewed, those allegations do not appear in posts published before the confrontation.
Chronology Observation
Based on the material reviewed, allegations that Abby Franklyn had previously threatened to petrol bomb the premises first appeared in Facebook posts published after the incident. No equivalent allegation has been identified in material reviewed from before the confrontation.
Witness Accounts
Within hours of the incident, numerous members of the public began commenting on Facebook. Several claimed to have witnessed the fire before the altercation, while others stated they had seen the confrontation itself. A number of commenters referred to Abby’s mobile phone footage, while others referred to CCTV footage reportedly held by private individuals. As with any public commentary, individual witness accounts should be considered alongside the wider body of evidence.
Further Witness Statements
Following publication of the initial reports, individuals identifying themselves as Abby Franklyn’s mother and grandmother each published public statements disputing Carrie-Anne Ridsdale’s account of events.
Abby’s mother wrote:
“I am Abby’s mum. I was there and it is lies.”
Abby’s grandmother also publicly disputed allegations that she had started the fire and provided her own account of the confrontation.
“I am the grandmother she accused of starting the fire. What she doesn’t tell is that she was continually in my face shouting abuse and threatening me. Also let’s get this straight, she hit Abby first. Naturally you would hit back. Yes, Abby did hit in self defence.”
These statements broadly align with Abby Franklyn’s public account that the confrontation escalated after an exchange involving her grandmother and that Abby struck Carrie-Anne Ridsdale only after allegedly being hit first. As with the other public statements documented in this report, these accounts remain allegations and have not been independently verified.
After the Incident
The order in which information became public is relevant. Prior to the incident, Jaynes Baby Bank’s Facebook page contained routine posts relating to volunteers, fundraising and general activity. Following the altercation, the page began publishing detailed allegations concerning Abby Franklyn, including claims that she had started the fire and had previously threatened to petrol bomb the premises. Based on the material reviewed, those allegations first appeared after the incident rather than beforehand.
Messages Received During the Incident
Whilst events were still unfolding, additional information was received from members of the public. Identifying details have been removed.
Message 1
Police everywhere.
One woman has been detained shouting that Carrie hit her first.
Carrie has locked herself inside the shop.
Police remain at the location.
Message 2
Carrie has remained inside the premises.
Police are requesting that she attends the police station voluntarily.
Further enquiries are continuing.
These messages were received whilst the incident was unfolding and provide a contemporaneous record of information before the later Facebook statements were published.
Photographic Evidence
A photograph taken by a member of the public at approximately midday appears to show Carrie-Anne Ridsdale outside the premises prior to the incident.
Several photographs taken shortly after the altercation also show Carrie-Anne Ridsdale with visible facial injuries.
Later that evening, a private citizen released a CCTV still which appears to show Carrie-Anne Ridsdale carrying items shortly before midnight.
Together, these images help establish parts of the day’s chronology but do not, on their own, determine responsibility for either the fire or the subsequent assault.
Evidence Reviewed
- Public Facebook posts published before and after the incident.
- Statements made publicly by Carrie-Anne Ridsdale.
- Statements made publicly by Abby Franklyn.
- Witness comments published on Facebook.
- Photographs taken by members of the public.
- Private CCTV stills released after the incident.
- Messages received during the incident.
- Reports referring to mobile phone footage and private CCTV.
Current Position
A fire occurred, members of the public intervened, a physical altercation followed and emergency services attended. What remains disputed is how those events unfolded. Abby Franklyn maintains that she extinguished the fire before being assaulted by Carrie-Anne and acting in self-defence. Carrie-Anne Ridsdale maintains that Abby started the fire before assaulting her and that private CCTV supports her version of events. At the time of writing, neither Abby’s mobile phone footage nor the private CCTV footage referred to by those involved has been released publicly in full, and no official findings have been published resolving the competing accounts.
Disclaimer This report is based on publicly available material, photographs, witness comments, messages received during the incident and statements published by those involved. It is intended to document the chronology of events and the competing public accounts. Allegations remain allegations unless established by independent evidence or official findings.