Ohio Woman Says Cops Broke Her Wrist for Recording During Traffic Stop
"The Officers' actions were unreasonable, deliberately indifferent, reckless, willful, wanton, and shocking to the conscience," a new legal complaint states.

A new lawsuit alleges that an Ohio woman suffered a broken wrist and other injuries after being violently arrested during a traffic stop, in part due to filming the police who pulled her over.
In February 2020, Amanda Mills was pulled over for speeding in Walton Hills, a small town outside Cleveland, Ohio. According to the suit, a police officer, identified in the lawsuit only as "Officer Schmidt" exited his cruiser "irate" and "screaming." Nervous, Mills began recording the encounter. Schmidt ordered Mills to get out of her vehicle. According to the suit, "Amanda asked 'why?' without making any other statement or any sudden movement. At this point, Officer Schmidt realized Amanda was filming him with her cellphone, and he became even more agitated."
According to the complaint, Schmidt "opened Amanda's driver-side door, grabbed her by the wrist and arm, and ripped her out of her vehicle." Another officer helped Schmidt pin Mills to the side of her vehicle. The suit alleges that "Amanda screamed that she was not resisting arrest and continued to cry out in pain." However, rather than releasing her, officers handcuffed Mills and put her in the back of their cruiser while they searched her vehicle. Eventually, Mills was released from custody after officers could not find illegal substances or outstanding warrants for her arrest. While Mills was initially charged with a first-degree misdemeanor for "failing to comply" with police orders, that charge was eventually dropped.
According to the suit, Mills was left with a broken wrist and other injuries to her arm and breasts. The complaint alleges that the officers' excessive force violated Mills' Fourth and 14th Amendment rights. The complaint also says that the Walton Hills Police Department's practices are the "moving force behind the injuries suffered by Amanda," and the department is guilty of "failing to adequately train, adequately supervise, as well as failing to investigate and discipline, its police officers when it comes to the excessive use of force."
While Mills' claims and the video she recorded are chilling, she faces an uphill battle in receiving restitution due to the specter of qualified immunity, the legal doctrine that protects government officials from civil liability even when their actions are unconstitutional.
In Mills' case, police seemed to have been enraged in particular by her attempt to film them—an activity which has consistently been ruled to be protected by the First Amendment.
"Forcibly removing someone from their vehicle without warning or reasonable circumstances and then violently slamming them against the car is so extreme, outrageous, and beyond the realm of human decency and intolerable in a civilized society that emotional distress is guaranteed to occur," the complaint reads. "The Officers' actions were unreasonable, deliberately indifferent, reckless, willful, wanton, and shocking to the conscience, all of which deprived Amanda of her civil rights."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Breast injuries = sexual assault.
No QI.
Forced gender affirming care. What's the problem?
Forced gender affirming care. Like Christianity and the Chinese imperial court used to “provide”, and Islam still does!
That would be the "forced" part that is the problem.
Why isn't there a police registry so that bad cops are banned from policing instead of just hopping to another jurisdiction ?
Something - something - union donations - something else
Google is by and by paying $27485 to $29658 consistently for taking a shot at the web from home. I have joined this action 2 months back and I have earned $31547 in my first month from this action. I can say my life is improved completely! Take a gander at it what I do…..
For more detail visit the given link……….>>> http://Www.jobsrevenue.com
The right of the people to be secure in their persons ... shall not be violated
. . . unless you can claim qualified immunity and just ignore the law with no consequence.
Cops sure make it easy to like them.
Know your rights...All 3 of them...
you haven't posted the obligatory song lately
Woman assaulted by group of Blue Men.
love it.
"Every great band should be shot/Before they make their 'Combat Rock'."
https://youtube.com/watch?v=5QOIS1tykgQ&si=EnSIkaIECMiOmarE
love that too.
While Mills' claims and the video she recorded are chilling, she faces an uphill battle in receiving restitution due to the specter of qualified immunity, the legal doctrine that protects government officials from civil liability even when their actions are unconstitutional.
This has become the "Jones Act" of police accoutability.
But in related news, I'm happy to say that the direct lawsuits against teachers and other various school officials are starting to roll off the assembly line.
Q: How do you get Democrats to defend Qualified immunity?
A: Start suing them.
Eventually, Mills was released from custody after officers could not find illegal substances
These amateurs didn't carry anything to plant on her? That's gotta violate department regulations.
But what color was everyone?
Skin color is the most important thing
Yeah, I’m reserving judgment until this is confirmed by actual journalists.
There seems to be no video of the arrest available.
That's just a random arm that PTL Schmidt is holding in the picture.
That’s a still photo. I can’t tell anything from that. What was she accused of? How was she behaving? How was the officer behaving? How long was the interaction? Etc.
Media has requested video from police but so far it's not been released. Reason leaves out she was charged with doing 66 in a 35MPH zone and pleaded guilty to driving 39MPH probably a gift to avoid insurance penalties and points on license. Alleged injuries occurred BEFORE police knew about recording - so no allegation the recording was the cause of any injuries as Reason infers.
Yeah, this well might be terrible...but I'm not taking Reason's word on it.
I’ll wait for the Law & Order Libertarians to weigh-in on why this okay because: Gangs.
Nobody can tell whether this was ok or not based on this limited amount of information.
Maybe ask the author?
Presumably, Emma has made her best case and given us all the info. That’s obviously not enough.
If you have more info, please share it.
I remodelled $700 per day exploitation my mobile partly time. I recently got my fifth bank check of $19632 and every one i used to be doing is to repeat and paste work online. This home work makes Pine Tree State able to generate more money daily simply straightforward to try and do work and regular financial gain from this are simply superb.
Here what i’m doing. strive currently………………>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
You're not from around here, are you?
There needs to be an amendment to the constitution clarifying that people have the inalienable right to record their personal memories anywhere they go.
The founders couldn’t have conceived the technology that enables it.
Obviously, court precedent isn’t enough.
I think we all know what this case was really about: she was a 'first amendment auditor' on youtube, deliberately attempting to be as non-compliant as possible in order to provoke the police, so as to get a juicy video for her channel, but like all those idiots, didn't actually know the law, and wasn't actually complying with lawful directions from the police.
There are endless videos on youtube of these Karens bringing shit on themselves, actively resisting arrest while shouting 'I am not resisting'.
I always forget the hordes of bootlickers here at the comments section of Reason.
Totally, and why on a libertarian site, of all places? Also see: people who bring up transgender issues on every single article, even this one, which has nothing to do with it. There is a single mention of breasts soooooooo let's bring it up.
I always forget the blind ideologues who rush to judgment without any information and believe every piece of propaganda that matches their prejudices.
We don't know what happened in this case. Emma's article isn't telling us.
We can have policy debates once we do know the facts.
In Mills' case, police seemed to have been enraged in particular by her attempt to film them—an activity which has consistently been ruled to be protected by the First Amendment.
When cops face no consequences for criminal activity, they will continue to engage in criminal activity.
Can we please, for the love of journalism god, please attempt to get a response from the department and/or cop and/or prosecutors? I know the response will be nil due to pending litigation, but still...
The alleged videos of their personal memories of the incident would provide far more reliable facts than any testimony ever will.
And if they do comment they will lie. You know as well as I do that police are professional liars.
Criminalize lying
She immediately pulled to the side of the road and had no weapons, drugs or anything illegal inside the car, the lawsuit said.
Mills was not driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, had no criminal history or outstanding warrants, and officers had no reason to think she might be dangerous, according to the lawsuit.
The officer was “irate” as he exited the cruiser and screamed at Mills, according to the lawsuit. He ordered Mills to get out of her car. Mills asked for a reason, and she started recording on her phone. The officer noticed her recording, according to the lawsuit.
Mills’ cellphone video shows Schmidt grab Mills’ arm and wrist and pull her out of the car as Mills tells the officer to stop and asks what he’s doing.
Mills several times yelled out in pain as Schmidt held her against her car, the video shows. Another officer, who is not named in the lawsuit, witnessed the incident.
Schmidt told the other officer that Mills was driving 66 mph in a 35 mph zone, and Mills was initially cited for driving that fast. She later pleaded no contest to driving 39 mph in a 35 mph zone.
https://www.cleveland.com/court-justice/2023/02/walton-hills-police-ripped-woman-out-of-car-during-traffic-stop-slammed-her-against-car-after-she-started-recording-officer-lawsuit-says.html
Yes, that says 39 in a 35 mph zone.
Predator cops like this continue to hide behind qualified immunity, allowing them to assault citizens at will without any accountability or consequence.
Recently released dashcam footage from Ohio shows the moments leading up to an altercation between a female police officer and a motorist on Sept. 10.
My Blog.. https://filecron.com/
Why do people unlock their doors when pulled over?