They patted down my 12-year-old daughter. >> Attorneys say that Joliet police illegally patted down a 12-year-old girl without any reason to do that. >> In February 2024, a routine traffic stop in Joliet, Illinois, escalated into something no one expected. And it was all caught on police body camera. Thin blue lies, baby. Police stopped a vehicle for traffic violations. A 20-year-old woman was driving. In the passenger seat was her 12-year-old sister. During the stop, an officer ordered the 12-year-old out of the car and conducted a pat down search. The child was not suspected of a crime. She was not armed and the adult driver was not searched. >> The girl's family announced today that they are filing a civil rights lawsuit against the city and police. Rose Schmidt shows us the encounter from the officer's body camera. >> The reason why I'm stopping you is for your flight. You don't have any of them on. >> It started out as a traffic stop. In February 2024, Joliet police pulled over a car with two sisters inside. This body camera video edited by police and provided to us by the family's attorneys. The video shows officers explaining why they asked the sisters to get out of the car. your your plates are suspended because of the registration. So, we're towing the vehicle. >> A new federal lawsuit centers around what happened as they got out of the car when an officer patted down the passenger, a 12-year-old girl, but not her older sister who was driving. Here's another view of what their attorneys now say was an illegal search. We were asked to blur the 12-year-old's face. The lawsuit alleges constitutional violations. >> A pat down isn't a casual interaction. Under the Fourth Amendment, it's a search. Police must have reasonable suspicion that a person is armed and dangerous. When the person being searched is a child, the legal standard is even higher. Courts consistently recognize that children have heightened protections. There was no allegation this child was armed, no claim she posed a danger, and no emergency that required immediate action. Joliet police later acknowledged the search violated department policy. The discipline issued to the officer was a notice of counseling. No suspension, no termination, no criminal charges, just internal paperwork after the violation was already caught on camera. >> There was no 911 call which should, you know, have made them suspicious. No bank robbery, no driving down the street at 80 or 90 miles an hour, nothing. Just a routine traffic stop. >> Can I ask you why you patted down a minor? The girl's older sister wanted an explanation, as did their mother, Nyaka Jones, who asked for a sergeant. >> They patted down my 12-year-old daughter. I ran to the scene in a panic, trying to make sure that everything was okay. My trigger was simply going to visit their grandmother when all of this happened. >> According to the girl's family, the 12-year-old now suffers from anxiety and has required therapy. That's the part police reports never include. A federal civil rights lawsuit has been filed, alleging violations of the fourth and 14th amendments. >> The complaint alleges Joliet police later acknowledged that the search violated department policy and the officer involved was disciplined. Joliet police tells NBC 5 it can't comment on pending litigation. Jones says her daughter has had to attend therapy as a result of this encounter. >> She's developed um separation anxiety. Um don't she don't want me to go anywhere. And then comes the part every police department hates. Supervision. The sergeant asks the question that apparently no one else at the scene thought to ask. You seriously patted down the little girl. Not did you have reasonable suspicion? Not what threat did she pose? Just pure disbelief like someone just microwaved aluminum foil in the squad room microwave. And then comes the professional assessment. You made a mistake. a mistake, like a typo, like forgetting to log mileage. Not illegally searching a 12-year-old child on the side of the road. And the officer, he agrees. No argument, no explanation, just quiet acceptance, the universal sound of getting caught on camera. This is the moment departments hope never leaves internal review. Unfortunately for them, body cams don't forget, and neither does the internet. Body camera also captured the following conversation between the officer and his sergeant. >> You seriously patted down that little girl? >> Uh, when a police supervisor looks at body cam footage and says, "You made a mistake." That's not accountability. That's damage control. Because mistakes get erased, violations don't. And this wasn't a paperwork error. It was an illegal search of a child. This case didn't come to light because the system worked. It came to light because there was video. Without that camera, this never even becomes a conversation. So remember, knowing your rights isn't anti- police. It's protection for you, for your kids, and for anyone who might otherwise be told later that what happened to them was just a mistake. And that's exactly why knowing your rights matters. Not after the fact. Before you're standing on the side of the road trying to figure out what just happened. I've put together a Know Your Rights, police encounters guide, plain English, no legal jargon, covering searches, traffic stops, and what police can and can't do. It's linked below. Because rights only matter if you know them. And cameras only help if someone's still watching. Thin blue lies, baby.