TOLEDO — The executor of the estate of a Chelsea man who was shot and killed by Tama County Deputy Heath Brown in 2021 has filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the county, Brown, Sheriff Dennis Kucera and five unnamed “John Does” believed to have been involved in the incident, and he is seeking financial damages on behalf of the deceased.

Shawn R. Fowlkes, the executor of the late Dewey Dale Wilfong III’s estate, is listed as the plaintiff in the 25 page complaint, which is dated Aug. 3. It alleges that Brown violated Wilfong’s constitutional rights and used excessive force when he shot him on Oct. 28, 2021, after Brown and other law enforcement officers witnessed Wilfong “displaying a handgun toward others in a threatening manner” when they were called to a residence on Station Street in Chelsea.

According to a statement issued by the Tama County Attorney’s Office at the time, a standoff ensued and escalated to the point where Wilfong fired the handgun, and Brown then shot one round, hitting Wilfong in the torso. Brown, whose name was not publicly released until months after the incident, was placed on administrative leave but has since returned to the field and is still employed by the Tama County Sheriff’s Office.

The recently filed lawsuit disputes the official version of events as presented by law enforcement — and widely shared in a subsequent press release from the Iowa Department of Public Safety — claiming that Wilfong’s actions necessitated the use of lethal force.

According to the suit, Wilfong’s father, Dewey Wilfong Jr., who was with him at the time law enforcement arrived, adamantly denied that his son ever pointed the firearm at anyone or displayed it in a threatening manner.

“According to the medical examiner, ‘no projectile or projectile fragments were recovered.’ Further, the medical examiner indicated the bullet entered Wilfong III’s chest (front) and then traveled downward from the right to the left exiting his lower back. All of the official public reports (autopsy and two press releases) state only one bullet was discharged by law enforcement,” the suit reads. “Neither the DPS press releases nor the Medical Examiner’s report state that Wilfong III ever discharged a weapon in the moments before being shot. Two residents from across the street from the shooting, one of whom had initially called 911, report that there was only one shot fired the entire evening, and that was the shot that killed Wilfong III.”

The filing also presents photo evidence of the bullet’s trajectory and contends that Wilfong III’s gun never had any ammunition in it while also disputing the assertion that he had taken a hostage inside of his residence.

“Plaintiff Asserts that the ‘hostage’ claims were manufactured as a reason to wrongfully shoot and kill Wilfong III. All persons present in the residence and present with Wilfong III deny there was ever a ‘hostage’ situation. All other persons in the home where Wilfong III was shot and killed were removed from the residence before Wilfong III was shot and killed,” the suit reads. “An officer could be heard on dispatch approximately five times excitedly saying he ‘had a shot’ (presumably an open shot to shoot and kill Wilfong III), while repeatedly requesting permission to fire.”

Brown, the suit alleges, did not give Wilfong III a verbal warning before shooting him, and the plaintiff does not believe he presented a threat to himself or anyone else. Fowlkes goes on to accuse the deputy of violating the county’s use of force policies and the sheriff’s department of “routinely refus(ing) to adequately investigate or discipline officers alleged to have been involved in the illegal and/or excessive use of force so as to ratify acts of improper conduct, and/or take measures designed to eliminate such activities from taking place, including violent acts and/or criminal activities with knowledge of their illegality and/or an officer’s propensity for violence, and including acts of violence by officers against detainees and civilians.”

Fowlkes, represented by attorney Thomas P. Frerichs of Waterloo, is seeking damages commensurate with the money Wilfong III would have accumulated had he lived out his natural lifespan, burial costs, punitive damages against the defendants, attorney fees and other allowable costs associated with the litigation. Because of the ongoing nature of the litigation, Frerichs declined to comment, and Kucera also declined to make a statement or comment on the matter.

Hearing and trial dates have not yet been set.