Prosecutors allege Joshua Freitag forced entry into a residence he owned after separating from his wife, who told police he no longer lived there.
SOMERS, Conn. — One of the central legal questions surrounding an Aug. 18 killing in Somers reaches beyond the fatal shooting itself: Police say Joshua Freitag forced his way into a home where he no longer lived, while his defense has emphasized that he still owned the property.
The dispute surfaced immediately after Freitag, 33, was charged with murder, home invasion and two counts of risk of injury to a child in the death of Mark Anthony Morgan, 34, of Enfield. At Freitag’s first court appearance, his attorney stressed his ownership interest in the South Road residence as part of an argument for a lower bond. Prosecutors, meanwhile, relied on an arrest warrant describing a broken rear sliding door, changed household access and an estranged wife who told police Freitag had moved out. Whether prosecutors can prove home invasion under those circumstances is a matter for the court; the charging decision itself is not a finding of guilt.
Public court records cited by local news organizations showed that divorce proceedings had started shortly before Morgan’s death. Freitag’s estranged wife told state police that Freitag was no longer living at the residence and that she had changed access to the front entrance. She was staying there with the couple’s two children. Morgan was also at the home during the overnight hours leading into Aug. 18. Freitag’s attorney later referred to Morgan as the woman’s new boyfriend, while the arrest warrant described longstanding hostility between Freitag and Morgan.
That history, according to investigators, became relevant before anyone entered the house. The woman told police that Freitag contacted her after spotting Morgan’s vehicle in the driveway. She initially denied that Morgan was present. The warrant said the men had a history of disliking each other and had fought before, providing context for why the woman said she was reluctant to acknowledge Morgan was there. Investigators have not presented that history as a legal justification for the shooting, and the state still must prove its account of Freitag’s actions.
The woman later told detectives that she went to sleep downstairs while Morgan slept in an upstairs bedroom. She said she woke to the sound of breaking glass and saw Freitag entering through the rear of the residence. Prosecutors later alleged that Freitag had parked away from the property and used a sledgehammer to break the sliding door. The woman said he then went upstairs. Police allege that Freitag entered Morgan’s room and fired multiple shots. She and the two children were not physically injured.
When state troopers reached South Road shortly after 4 a.m., they found Freitag outside near the front of the house, according to police. He followed officers’ commands and was detained without incident. Investigators reported finding a handgun, empty magazine and holster near the entrance. Upstairs, emergency personnel found Morgan unresponsive and attempted life-saving measures. He was pronounced dead around 4:20 a.m. The woman and children were escorted from the residence as the investigation shifted from an emergency response to a homicide inquiry.
The facts about residence and ownership quickly became part of the bond argument. Defense attorney Anthony Spinella said Freitag still owned the home and financially supported the two children who lived there. He also noted that Freitag had no criminal record and had surrendered to police, seeking to reduce the bond from $1.5 million to $250,000. Prosecutors cited the alleged manner of entry, the shooting and the children’s presence in asking the court to keep the higher amount. Judge Alyce L. Alfano left Freitag’s bond at $1.5 million.
The court also issued protective orders covering the woman and the children. Those orders addressed the immediate family-safety issues while the criminal case moved forward. Police said neither child was wounded, but investigators charged Freitag with two counts of risk of injury because both minors were inside the residence during the alleged attack. Authorities have not said that the children were direct targets. Their presence nevertheless forms an independent part of the state’s charging theory and contributed to the seriousness of the first court hearing.
Morgan’s family confronted a different consequence of the case in that same courtroom. Relatives attended the arraignment, and his mother became visibly emotional as prosecutors recounted the allegations. Reports published afterward identified Morgan as a father of two who worked in commercial flooring. A fundraiser organized after his death described him as devoted to his family and friends and sought money for funeral costs and support for his children. Those personal details do not decide the criminal charges, but they show the loss behind a case otherwise dominated by warrants, bond arguments and property questions.
Weeks later, the investigation expanded in a direction separate from the dispute over access to the home. A search conducted Aug. 25 led police to two large-capacity Glock magazines, according to a later arrest warrant. Investigators said the magazines each had a 22-round capacity and contained 21 rounds. Authorities also reported recovering several other firearms, including pistols, a revolver and a shotgun, and said those guns were legally registered to Freitag. The magazines became the basis for a new criminal case rather than an expansion of the original home-invasion count.
On Sept. 18, state police charged Freitag with two counts of illegal possession of a large-capacity magazine. A public defender was appointed in that case, and court records cited by Patch showed a separate $1,000 cash-or-surety bond. The smaller bond had no practical effect on Freitag’s detention because his $1.5 million bond remained in place on the homicide case. The magazine matter was continued to Oct. 23. Authorities have not announced a trial date for the murder and home-invasion prosecution in the reporting reviewed here.
The later weapons charges illustrate how the case has developed on two tracks. The homicide prosecution focuses on what happened at the South Road residence on Aug. 18: the communications about Morgan, Freitag’s alleged entry, the shooting and the presence of the children. The newer case focuses on what police say they discovered during a later compliance search. Evidence from one investigation may have led officers to the other, but the charges remain legally distinct and must be proven separately.
The defense has not had a trial opportunity to test the state’s evidence or present a full account of the events. The fact that Freitag had an ownership interest in the property does not, by itself, resolve the home-invasion allegation, just as the state’s accusation that he forced entry does not establish guilt. Those questions will depend on Connecticut law, admissible evidence and future court rulings rather than on the competing descriptions offered at an early bond hearing.
As of Sept. 28, Freitag remained in custody and faced both the homicide prosecution and the separate magazine case. Morgan’s death remains the central event, while questions about residence, access, protective orders and weapons possession are now part of the broader legal record. Freitag is presumed innocent unless convicted.
Author note: Last updated September 28, 2026.