Connecticut police foot pursuit shooting coverage centers on a June 24, 2026 New Britain case in which officers chased two males after nearby shots-fired calls and one juvenile was wounded after police said he fired toward a detective. The case is still source-based, not a final legal ruling, so attribution matters.
Table of Contents
What The Connecticut Police Foot Pursuit Shooting Case Is About
The Connecticut police foot pursuit shooting case began with a pair of related emergency calls in New Britain, Connecticut, according to the PoliceActivity source video description and local reporting. The first call involved reported shots fired at 15 Union Street. Officers who responded reportedly saw spent shell casings in the street and bullet holes on the outside of a residence.
About nine minutes later, police received another 911 call about two males wearing masks and hoodies and acting suspiciously near the TD Bank branch at 178 Main Street, according to NBC Connecticut and WFSB. Officers went to that area, saw two males matching the caller’s description, and attempted to stop and speak with them. The two males ran, and officers pursued them toward the parking area near a nearby Red Roof Inn and then toward 1 Herald Square.
The key moment, as described by the Inspector General account reported by NBC Connecticut and WFSB, occurred in a parking lot adjacent to 1 Herald Square. One of the fleeing males, later described as a 17-year-old New Britain resident whose name was not released because he is a juvenile, allegedly fired a shot toward Detective Jeffry Nedderman, who was the closest pursuer. Nedderman returned fire and struck the juvenile several times, according to those source accounts.
This article does not independently determine whether every police action was justified. It explains what the released source says, what local reporting attributes to the Connecticut Office of Inspector General, and why readers should keep bodycam footage, charges, recovered evidence, and legal conclusions in separate categories.
Connecticut Police Foot Pursuit Shooting Timeline From Union Street To Herald Square
The Connecticut police foot pursuit shooting timeline starts at about 2:54 p.m. on Wednesday, June 24, 2026. According to WFSB and NBC Connecticut, New Britain police received 911 calls reporting shots fired at 15 Union Street. Officers arrived and found evidence that supported a shots-fired response: spent shell casings in the street and bullet holes on the exterior of a residence.
About nine minutes later, dispatch received a second call. This report described two males in masks and hoodies acting suspiciously near TD Bank at 178 Main Street. That call is important because it shifted the response from a stationary scene at Union Street to a possible search for two people nearby. Officers were not yet making a final finding about who fired at Union Street; they were responding to a new report close in time and location.
Several officers responded to the Main Street area. The source video description says Officer Joseph Milhomens was on a bicycle, while Officer Jillian Korwek, Detective Nedderman, and Sergeant Michael Slavin responded in an unmarked police vehicle. WFSB reported that Nedderman was in plain clothes and was attempting to put on his ballistic vest, with his body-worn camera attached, when the vehicle stopped.
The two males ran into the parking lot of a nearby Red Roof Inn after officers attempted to stop them, according to the reports. The foot pursuit continued into a parking lot adjacent to 1 Herald Square. PoliceActivity’s video description and the local reports say one male then fired a shot toward Nedderman. Nedderman returned fire with his duty weapon, and the juvenile was wounded.
After the shooting, officers took the juvenile into custody and provided medical aid before he was transported to a hospital and underwent surgery. NBC Connecticut and WFSB reported that he was expected to survive. The second male was tackled in the parking lot by Officer Milhomens, according to the reporting and the source description, and officers recovered another handgun equipped with a high-capacity magazine from him.
7 Source-Based Facts Readers Should Keep Separate
A fast bodycam clip can make a complicated incident feel simple. The Connecticut police foot pursuit shooting is easier to understand when the known points are separated from what remains under review. These seven facts come from the PoliceActivity source description and local reporting that attributes details to the Inspector General.
- The first call was a shots-fired response. Police were called to 15 Union Street around 2:54 p.m. and reportedly found shell casings and bullet holes outside a residence.
- The second call described two masked males nearby. The later report placed two males near TD Bank at 178 Main Street, wearing masks and hoodies and acting suspiciously, according to local reporting.
- Officers attempted a stop before the chase. Reports say officers saw two males matching the description and tried to speak with them before both ran.
- The pursuit involved different officer positions. One officer was on a bicycle, while other officers arrived in an unmarked vehicle, and Detective Nedderman reportedly had not secured the vest holding his body-worn camera.
- The shooting occurred near 1 Herald Square. The released account places the decisive confrontation in a parking lot adjacent to 1 Herald Square.
- A handgun and casing were reportedly recovered near the wounded juvenile. NBC Connecticut reported that investigators said a handgun and spent shell casing were recovered next to where the teen fell.
- The investigation remained ongoing in the reviewed sources. NBC Connecticut reported that the Inspector General would not release a preliminary status report because no death occurred, and that the investigation remained ongoing.
Keeping those points separate protects the article from overclaiming. A reported charge is not a conviction. A bodycam release is not the full investigative file. An Inspector General investigation can examine physical evidence, officer statements, radio traffic, witness interviews, scene photographs, and video before reaching any final public conclusion.
This is also why Navyago uses source language such as “according to,” “police said,” “the Inspector General account reported,” and “the video description states.” Those phrases are not hedging for style. They show readers exactly which claims are reported and which questions still depend on official review.
What The Bodycam Release Can And Cannot Show
Body-worn camera footage in the Connecticut police foot pursuit shooting can be useful because it gives the public a time-stamped view of officer movement, commands, pursuit direction, and immediate aftermath. NBC Connecticut reported that footage was released from the body-worn cameras of Milhomens, Korwek, and Slavin. PoliceActivity’s video also labels chapters for those officers’ bodycam views.
At the same time, the bodycam record is not complete from every angle. NBC Connecticut reported that Nedderman’s body-worn camera footage was not released because he was in plain clothes and had not put on the vest that carried his camera before the chase began. That detail matters because he was described as the closest pursuer at the decisive moment. Readers should avoid assuming the released clips show exactly what he saw.
Bodycam footage may also omit the larger scene context. It may not include the full 911 calls, every radio transmission, complete witness interviews, all physical evidence, or the full distance between each officer and the two fleeing males. Video can help answer some questions while leaving others for the Inspector General’s evidence review.
This is the same reading method Navyago applies in other public-safety explainers, including its article on the Florida phone ticket dismissal. The footage is important, but it should be read with the source report, not treated as a stand-alone verdict.
Charges, Juvenile Privacy, And Legal-Safe Wording
The juvenile was not publicly identified in the reviewed sources because he is 17 years old. PoliceActivity’s source description and WFSB reported that he is a New Britain resident. The local reports said he was charged with criminal attempt at assault in the first degree, unlawful discharge of a firearm, carrying a pistol without a permit, and other offenses.
Those are reported charges, not final convictions. The article therefore does not call the juvenile guilty and does not assign motive. It also avoids repeating private details beyond what the public reports provide. In sensitive cases involving a minor, readers need enough detail to understand the public incident without turning the article into a dossier about a young person who has not had a final court outcome.
The second male was identified in the source description as Ossain Gayle, 18, of New Britain. NBC Connecticut reported that police recovered a handgun equipped with a high-capacity magazine from him. The reports say he was charged with illegal possession of a firearm, possession of a high-capacity magazine, interfering with an officer, and other offenses. Again, those are charges as reported by sources.
Legal-safe wording is especially important here because the story starts with an earlier shots-fired call at Union Street and then moves to a later foot pursuit near Main Street and Herald Square. WFSB specifically noted that the juvenile charges cited in its story were tied to the 1 Herald Square events and did not include conduct that may have occurred at 15 Union Street. That distinction helps readers avoid connecting separate events more strongly than the source record allows.
Why The Ongoing Inspector General Review Matters
The Connecticut police foot pursuit shooting is not fully resolved by the first public video release. WFSB described the material as bodycam footage and preliminary findings from the June 24 shooting. NBC Connecticut reported that the Inspector General said he would not release a preliminary status report because a death did not occur, and that the investigation remained ongoing.
An ongoing review can consider more than what appears in a short public video. Investigators may review scene measurements, ballistic evidence, recovered firearms, spent casings, photographs, witness statements, officer reports, dispatch records, and medical information. They may also examine when each officer arrived, what each officer knew, where each person was positioned, and what was visible at the moment force was used.
The most legally careful description is therefore narrow: according to the source accounts, a juvenile allegedly fired toward Detective Nedderman during a foot pursuit, and Nedderman returned fire, wounding him. The next question – whether that use of deadly force met legal and policy standards – belongs to the reviewing authorities and the fuller record.
That does not mean the public should ignore the video. Public releases can improve transparency, allow residents to understand why police were in the area, and show how quickly a suspicious-person call can become a high-risk pursuit. But transparency and final adjudication are different things. A reader can value the release while still waiting for the completed review.
Public-Safety Takeaways From The New Britain Foot Pursuit
The first takeaway from the Connecticut police foot pursuit shooting is that callers should give specific, verifiable information. The reports in this case included a location, a clothing description, and suspicious behavior near a named bank branch. Specific information helps officers know where to respond and what to look for, although it still must be tested against what officers actually observe.
The second takeaway is that flight from police can rapidly raise risk for everyone nearby. A chase through parking lots can involve pedestrians, drivers, hotel guests, bank customers, officers, and the fleeing people themselves. When firearms are present or alleged, the margin for error narrows quickly. That is one reason a short sequence can become both a criminal case and a police-use-of-force review.
The third takeaway is about equipment and timing. The reporting says Nedderman had not secured his vest with the attached body-worn camera before the foot pursuit began. That fact does not answer whether the shooting was justified, but it does show how fast incidents can outrun ideal documentation. Agencies and reviewers often look at whether officers had reasonable opportunities to activate or wear cameras and what policy requires in fast-developing events.
The fourth takeaway is that readers should avoid social-media certainty. A post can frame the case as a simple hero story or a simple misconduct story. The better public-interest approach is slower: identify what the 911 calls reported, what officers observed, what the released bodycam shows, what evidence was recovered, what charges were filed, and what questions remain open. That is why the Connecticut police foot pursuit shooting should be read as a source-based explainer rather than a final legal judgment.
FAQ About The Connecticut Police Foot Pursuit Shooting
What happened in the Connecticut police foot pursuit shooting?
According to source reports, New Britain officers pursued two males after shots-fired and suspicious-person calls on June 24, 2026. A juvenile was wounded after police said he fired toward Detective Nedderman during the chase.
Where did the incident happen?
The sequence began with a shots-fired call at 15 Union Street, moved to a report near TD Bank at 178 Main Street, and ended in a parking lot adjacent to 1 Herald Square in New Britain.
Why was the 17-year-old not named?
The reviewed sources say he was not publicly identified because he is a juvenile. This article follows that limit and avoids publishing private details beyond the public source record.
What charges were reported?
Reports said the juvenile was charged with offenses including criminal attempt at assault in the first degree, unlawful discharge of a firearm, and carrying a pistol without a permit. Those are charges, not convictions.
Was the investigation complete?
No. NBC Connecticut reported that the Inspector General said the investigation remained ongoing and that no preliminary status report would be released because no death occurred.
Does the video prove whether the shooting was justified?
No. The video is relevant public evidence, but a final conclusion depends on the fuller investigative record, applicable law, agency policy, and what each officer could reasonably perceive.
Source Video
Sources: Source video: PoliceActivity, “Masked Teen Opens Fire During Foot Pursuit With Connecticut Police”. Official source: Connecticut Division of Criminal Justice / Office of Inspector General release. Reporting reviewed: NBC Connecticut and WFSB. Sources were accessed July 19, 2026. This article is for news and educational purposes and is not legal advice.