Lawyer Convicted of Manslaughter in Shooting Incident

News Summary

Robert Fisher Jr., a 78-year-old attorney, has been found guilty of manslaughter following a fatal shooting outside his office in Litchfield. The jury’s decision ignites discussions on self-defense and firearm ethics. Fisher’s bond was increased to $150,000 as he awaits sentencing on June 10, 2025. The trial explored the intense confrontation leading to the shooting, with arguments from both prosecution and defense regarding Fisher’s actions during the incident.

Attorney Found Guilty of Manslaughter in Litchfield Shooting Case

A jury has delivered a verdict of guilty for Robert Fisher Jr., a 78-year-old attorney, following a fatal shooting incident that unfolded outside his office in Litchfield in June 2021. The jury reached their decision on March 7, 2025, after five days of testimony and arguments at Torrington Superior Court. The verdict came around 4:30 p.m. and followed three hours of deliberation, igniting a fervor of discussion around issues of self-defense, firearm ownership, and the ethics of using deadly force.

Increased Bond and Sentencing Schedule

Following the jury’s decision, Fisher’s bond was elevated from $50,000 to $150,000. This change was ordered in light of the conviction, and Fisher was also required to surrender his passport by the following Monday. However, later that evening, he managed to post the increased bond and was subsequently released from custody, with sentencing set to take place on June 10, 2025.

The Incident: A Deadly Confrontation

The confrontation leading to the tragic shooting began when Matthew Bromley, 39, allegedly pursued Fisher’s vehicle and initiated a physical altercation by throwing punches and spitting at the attorney. In a tense moment captured during the trial, the prosecution detailed that Fisher brandished a Ruger pistol and aimed its red dot laser at Bromley before fatally shooting him in the left eye. The forensic evidence collected indicated the shot was fired at a close range of six to 18 inches, with gunshot residue reinforcing the proximity of the encounter.

Arguments for Manslaughter

Initially charged with first-degree manslaughter, Fisher’s charge was ultimately reduced to manslaughter with intent. The prosecution, led by State’s Attorney David R. Shannon, argued that Fisher had a legal “duty to retreat” in the face of violence and questioned whether shooting Bromley was necessary, especially in light of the minor injuries initially inflicted. Shannon contested that Fisher took decisive action, suggesting that the shooting was not merely a defensive response but a more calculated act fueled by anger and pride.

Defense Claims of Self-Defense

Conversely, Fisher’s defense team, spearheaded by attorney William A. Conti, focused on the narrative that Fisher, given his frail physical condition and existing medical ailments, had no safe opportunity to retreat. Conti claimed Fisher’s fears for his life were genuine, emphasizing that the confrontation was one of survival rather than aggression. Fisher himself recounted his version of events, asserting that he perceived Bromley as a significant threat due to the latter’s violent behavior.

Testimonies and Expert Evidence

Throughout the trial, the jury was presented with testimony from various forensic experts, law enforcement officers, and character witnesses who attested to Fisher’s nature. Notably, evidence was brought forth indicating that Bromley’s blood alcohol level stood at 0.11 at the time of the incident, potentially contributing to his aggressive conduct. A forensic scientist provided expert testimony that supported the reconstruction of events in favor of Fisher’s assertion of self-defense.

The Verdict and Societal Repercussions

As discussions continue within Litchfield regarding the ethics surrounding self-defense and the responsibilities that come with firearm ownership, the jury’s decision on this high-profile case opens up larger conversations about the legal standards that govern such incidents. Judge Eliot D. Prescott reminded jurors to focus purely on the evidence presented and to decide the case without bias or sympathy, emphasizing the profound implications of their verdict.

With sentencing fast approaching, the community remains captivated by the potential consequences of Fisher’s conviction, pondering the balance between self-defense rights and the ramifications of using deadly force.