On April 11, 2022, Wilford Deweese, a 67-year-old unemployed accountant from Florida, drew a gun on a bartender at the Royal Tavern bar in Manitou Springs.
Later, when confronted by Levi Hoover and Jeffrey Schuelke from the Manitou Springs Police Department and deputies Ronnie Hancock and Daniel LeBaron of the El Paso County Sheriff’s Office, he refused to surrender.
In the ensuing exchange, Deweese fatally shot K9 Jinx and exchanged fire with police, resulting in his death.
The following is the second part of the investigative story that began running in the May 3 Pikes Peak Bulletin.
This account relies on three open-record requests to the Colorado Springs Police Department, El Paso County Sheriff’s Office and the Manitou Springs Police Department, which included requests for police body camera footage of all involved officers that night, civilian videos and civilian interviews.
Several hundred pages of police investigation records and interviews were reviewed, along with several hours of phone and in-person interviews with active and retired members of the law enforcement community.
On Aug. 5, 2022, the 4th Judicial District Attorney’s office released a statement that the police’s use of deadly force was justified. It stated Wilford Deweese had threatened a civilian at the bar that night with a gun, a felony offense, and shot sheriff’s department K9 Jinx.
It said that, “Deputy Hancock had an objectively reasonable belief that Mr. Deweese did in fact pose an imminent danger to multiple police officers including himself, to citizens who were in the hotel across the street, and to other civilians in the vicinity if Mr. Deweese began shooting.”
The report also described the final events of that night in the 800 block of Manitou Avenue:
“Deputy Hancock deployed K9 Jinx and officers began a simultaneous coordinated movement to contact Mr. Deweese. As the K9 ran towards the base of the walkway where Mr. Deweese was located, Mr. Deweese pulled a handgun from his pocket and fired at K9 Jinx, fatally striking him in the head. Mr. Deweese then fired at officers as they moved down the walkway, and in response, Officers Hoover and Schuelke, and Deputies Hancock and LeBaron returned fire with their duty weapons.”
The report also stated that Deweese told a relative he would shoot the dog but it did not specify whether officers heard him say this. The only person in police records with whom Deweese definitely spoke that night was his friend Steve Anderson, a Minnesota resident.
There was no discussion about the team with the 40-mm non-lethal projectile launchers being en route to the scene.
News coverage over the next year broadly reported that Deweese had fired on police before they had returned fire. A year after the incident, the El Paso County Sheriff’s Office held a commemoration service for Jinx.
“Hope, love and commitment,” El Paso County Sheriff Joe Roybal said during the ceremony, “The undoubted sacrifice and commitment that our K9 partners have for their human partners, that they lay down their lives to save those of their human partners.”
The occasion was also used to promote “Jinx’s law,” which increased the penalties and fines for killing or wounding a police dog. The state of Colorado passed this law on April 17, 2024.
According to Caitlin Ford, public information officer for the Colorado Springs Police Department, a multi-agency team reviews all officer-involved shootings that result in injury or death. That means that an uninvolved law enforcement department, in this case CSPD, investigates the case.
Protocol requires that a member from the Deadly Force Investigative Team reaches out to the next of kin to keep them informed of the case. According to police records, Deweese’s son was contacted but never called back. Records also show that Deweese had been estranged from his son.
Police spoke with Deweese’s ex-wife, Anderson and Deweese’s brother Sam after the shooting. Soon after, the family hired a lawyer. According to Ford, hiring a lawyer would have prevented the team from further discussing details of the investigation directly with family.
Upon request, CSPD provided the civilian video that had been missing from the family’s initial records request clearly showing Deweese shooting K9 Jinx and then exchanging fire with police.
According to Ford, because it was civilian footage, it was considered evidence and any requested evidence would not have been released until after the district attorney ruled on the case and the investigating team cleared it. The family’s last documented request for records occurred before the district attorney’s office released its final ruling.
A records inquiry to obtain documents containing officer interviews missing from the Deweese family lawyer’s initial requests revealed that it had been mislabeled in the computer system. According to a records department representative, this may have contributed to their omission from previous records requests.
In these interviews, LeBaron said he shot at Deweese as soon as he saw him reach for the gun to shoot the dog.
“Nobody is going to try and intimidate a dog with a replica firearm,” LeBaron told detectives. “The only reason he was pulling it out and the only reason he was tracking Jinx was to … kill Jinx. And if he’s prepared to do that, he’s prepared to fire on us as we’re approaching.
“I didn’t believe there was any other intention for him, other than to shoot the dog and then to turn the rest of his rounds at us.”
LeBaron noted how calm and calculated Deweese seemed in that moment.
“I felt he was completely committed to what he was about to do and … he wasn’t going to just shoot the dog and then throw his hands down and surrender,” he said.
In police case law, justification for police to use force, including both non-lethal and lethal forms, is determined by criteria set forth in the 1989 court case Graham vs. Connor.
The criteria include the severity of the crime, whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to police or others, and whether the suspect is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight. Not all three are required, especially if other extenuating circumstances exist.
In his recollection of that night, Hancock told police detectives that Deweese met all three.
Sam Deweese obtained written opinions from police K9 expert Ernie Burwell and police use of force expert Roger Clark, both retired from the Los Angeles Police Department. Their reports stated that MSPD Officer Hoover and Schuelke’s initial interaction with Deweese were appropriate, but disagree with the use of the K9 that night.
Even though the police knew Deweese was armed, the experts argued he showed no signs of active aggression before police released the dog, and so they should have spent more time trying to de-escalate the situation, allowing greater opportunity for peaceful surrender or to coordinate another non-lethal approach with additional officers.
Burwell and Clark said that Deweese was passively resisting and had not shown any sign of being a flight risk. They also said that his slowness and non-compliance from his intoxication did not present an escalating threat to officers or civilians.
They stated that officers should have established better verbal communication with Deweese and that the 7 minutes, 30 seconds of dialogue that Hancock had with Deweese was unproductive because of the barking dog.
Clark stated that officers should have taken more time and consulted with supervising officers, waited for the additional incoming non-lethal support and established better communication with the suspect. In his opinion, a 40-mm projectile was “exactly the logical tool in this set of facts and would have incapacitated Mr. Deweese should he pose a credible threat.”
None of the officer interviews discussed tactics relating to the 40-mm launchers. Hancock told detectives that he knew about the extra help coming but that he was not aware of the specifics of their capabilities and had difficulty simultaneously focusing on talking with Deweese and listening to any ongoing reports over the radio.
One objection that Burwell and Clark raised is that Deweese was not actively resisting.
Brad Smith, a retired K9 officer who served with the West Covina Police Department in Southern California for 30 years, discussed this in a phone interview with the Bulletin.
Smith owned Canine Tactical Operations and Consulting and provided expert K9 witness testimony in civil litigation and served as Canine Section chair for the National Tactical Officers Association since 1999. Smith died April 5, 2024.
Smith believed Deweese was actively resisting. He defined passive resistance in the form of peaceful, unarmed protestors. In his opinion, because Deweese was armed, wanted for a serious crime and law enforcement was asking him to surrender, his refusal to comply was active resistance. He gave an example to highlight his point.
Hope, love and commitment. – Joe Roybal
“Let’s say this guy robbed this bar where he was at, and you know that he’s in this backyard and then someone spotted him from another yard. ‘Hey, he’s in those bushes’ and so you shine your flashlight, shine your spotlight. You describe him, ‘hey you, wearing red socks and blue pants in that bush’ and he doesn’t come out.
“To me, that’s still active resistance because he’s not doing what you told him to. Do you want to be the one that (says) ‘he’s just a passive resister, he’s not going to do anything.’ You should have just walked up to the bush and put him in handcuffs … that’s a dead cop. That’s the way people think, that’s the way experts think that are hired by family members.”
According to Smith, law enforcement’s decision to use force is based on what officers knew at that time, not what was ultimately discovered about the situation. Thus, what police knew was that Deweese was armed and had threatened a civilian with a gun.
Furthermore, Smith explained that there is no minimum time police are required to give a suspect before escalating force; that is based on the totality of the circumstances.
Chris Burns, another retired local law enforcement officer, pointed out that there is a very real balance between the exigency of taking custody of a known armed person in a public area and continuing to try to talk or order him into compliance.
“The officers would reasonably perceive the longer the situation was allowed to continue, the more the chance for an armed person to be able to cause harm to officers or civilians,” he explained.
Another issue Clark raised was whether a 40-mm projectile launcher would have been the best option for the police that night. According to a local veteran Colorado police officer, “Jason,” who wished to remain anonymous, non-lethal weapons aren’t guaranteed to incapacitate a suspect, especially those that are intoxicated.
He has seen suspects get shot with non-lethal projectiles without fazing them. Officers must therefore consider how an armed suspect might respond with any failed intervention and how this might place the surrounding public at further risk. In this case, if unsuccessful, Deweese could have fired his weapon out into the public behind the police.
Deweese’s brother Sam couldn’t understand why, if public safety was such a concern, police didn’t first clear the scene before releasing a K9 against an armed suspect. How feasible would it have been for police to sufficiently clear the area to give them more time and opportunity to deal with Deweese?
Jason explained that, when engaging with an armed suspect, having four officers minimum is ideal, two to provide cover and two with lethal force capabilities. Manitou had two officers on duty that night, which led to the call for backup.
Because there was only four, they lacked the personnel to clear the area without exposing themselves to greater risk. Furthermore, the nearby buildings, such as the Barker House, with their windows and non-concrete walls, would have not been considered sufficient cover for gunfire.
I felt he was completely committed. – Daniel LeBaron
“I’ve seen bullets pierce through several walls before stopping,” Jason explained.
As far as Deweese’s depression and inebriation, how do police approach armed suspects who might be suffering from an acute mental health crisis?
According to Jason, some people who are acutely intoxicated or impaired from mental illness may say one thing and then do something else, and so what officers see takes priority over what the suspect is saying.
For example, when Hoover and Schuelke initially approached Deweese, he believed police could have shot him when he reached for his pocket.
What if Deweese had only intended to draw the gun to shoot the dog out of self-defense? What role would that have played in police decision-making that night?
Jason explained that, when he started reaching for his pocket, they were justified in shooting. Even if Deweese intended to shoot only at the dog, police couldn’t have objectively known that and, because they knew he was very likely armed, they could not have responsibly risked the possibility of the public behind them getting shot.
In these types of situations, Jason said, police must prioritize the safety of the surrounding public above even themselves and the suspect.
As far as Deweese’s motives, both CSPD and the District Attorney’s office explained in emails that, in officer-involved shootings, investigations and rulings are not based on the suspect’s motives but are strictly based on the conduct of officers in response to the unfolding situation.
In Deweese’s case, neither department has released a possible motive for his actions that night.
Sam Deweese declined to respond to details of the Bulletin’s investigation and did not consent to interviews of his hired experts regarding the case. El Paso County Sheriff’s Office and Manitou Springs Police Department both declined comment for this story.
Editor’s note: The Manitou Springs Police Department officially launched the Manitou Crisis Response team on March 1, 2023, partnering with UCHealth to deploy a police officer and a licensed mental health practitioner to behavioral-related calls.
