In Sestito v. Groton, 178 Conn. 520, 423 A.2d 165 (1979), the defendant police officer was on duty when he saw a group of men, including the plaintiff's decedent, arguing, scuffling and throwing punches in a parking lot adjacent to a bar. Id. at 523. After hearing gunshots, he attempted to call the police station for instructions, but did not intervene in the altercation, although he could have driven unimpeded into the parking lot. Id. Instead, he waited until the plaintiff's decedent was shot, at which time he drove into the parking lot and arrested the assailant. Id. The trial court directed a verdict in favor of the defendant on the basis of governmental immunity. Id. at 522. On appeal, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment. Id. at 529. Explaining its holding in Sestito in a subsequent case, the court stated: "Resolving conflicting testimony on the issue of imminence of harm in favor of the plaintiff, we held that the case should then have been submitted to the jury." Shore v. Stonington, 187 Conn. 147, 153, 444 A.2d 1379 (1982).