The recording preserved the passenger’s questions, the driver’s unusual claims and the moment he recognized police approaching the Mini Cooper.
CHARLOTTE, N.C. — The first public account of Griffin Haire’s alleged kidnapping did not come only from a police report. It came from inside his Mini Cooper, where a dashboard camera recorded an unfamiliar woman claiming to be his designated driver as she drove away with him still in the vehicle.
The recording has become a central part of the public narrative surrounding the June 25 encounter at a Circle K on Tyvola Road. Haire, 18, who has autism, can be heard asking the woman who she is and saying that he fears strangers, according to excerpts broadcast by local television stations. Police identified the driver as Amanda Gills, 44, and accused her of taking the car without permission, confining Haire during a roughly 40-minute drive and refusing to stop when officers found them. Gills was arrested on charges of second-degree kidnapping, larceny of a motor vehicle and fleeing to elude arrest in a motor vehicle. She has not been convicted of those charges.
The dash camera was already running when the encounter unfolded, creating a record from a viewpoint rarely available in an alleged abduction: the interior of the vehicle. Police said Haire had stopped for gas at 421 Tyvola Road while on his way home. His father, Dave Haire, said his son called to report that he had lost his keys. At some point during the stop, Gills allegedly entered the Mini Cooper and took the driver’s seat. The public excerpts do not show everything that happened before the vehicle left, and authorities have not released the full recording. The available portions begin with Haire trying to understand why a stranger is in control of his car.
“Who are you?” Haire asked, according to the recording aired by ABC11. He then said he was afraid of strangers. The woman responded that she was his designated driver and asserted that he was under the influence. Investigators have not said that Haire was impaired, and local reports described the taking of the car as apparently random. The claim therefore appears in the public record as something the driver allegedly said, not as an established explanation for her actions. The exchange is significant because it records Haire challenging the woman’s authority to drive and expressing that he did not know her.
The woman also told Haire that she would show him a good time and show him what earlier times in Charlotte were like, according to the excerpts. Haire’s recorded responses conveyed distress, including a reference to a monster and cries of fear. News organizations aired only limited sections of the audio, so the length and context of each conversation cannot be fully assessed from the public material. Still, the excerpts support the accounts from Haire’s family and police that he did not voluntarily join the driver for a trip. They also preserve statements investigators could compare against phone records, location data and officers’ observations.
While the dashboard camera recorded inside the vehicle, Haire’s phone carried parts of the same event to his family. He remained connected with relatives and gave them information about the car’s changing location. His family passed those updates to 911. Police records cited by ABC11 showed the Mini Cooper moving from the Tyvola Road area toward Independence Boulevard and eventually to W.T. Harris Boulevard. That route meant the alleged crime was not confined to the gas station where it began. Each mile potentially added evidence related to confinement, possession of the car and the driver’s response after police became involved.
The phone connection also gave Haire’s father information the camera could not provide to him at the time. Dave Haire said he heard panic in his son’s voice and heard a woman yelling in the background. He told WSOC-TV that he could tell something was wrong. The call later disconnected, cutting off the family’s direct contact. Investigators have not publicly stated whether the dropped call resulted from signal loss, a dead battery, an intentional act or another cause. The uncertainty increased the importance of the location information Haire had already supplied and of the officers searching for the moving car.
When police spotted the Mini Cooper, the recording captured another change in the encounter. Haire noticed an officer and told the driver to pull over. Police said the driver did not comply and instead continued, an allegation that formed the basis for the fleeing charge. A police helicopter then monitored the car. Public reports do not provide a complete transcript of the driver’s response or a second-by-second account of the pursuit. They do establish that Haire recognized police assistance, verbally urged the driver to stop and remained in the car while officers tracked it through Charlotte.
The dash-camera account reaches its most important point near East W.T. Harris Boulevard and North Tryon Street. Local reports agree that Haire got out after the vehicle slowed or stopped, though they describe the movement somewhat differently. One account said he jumped from the slowing Mini Cooper; another said he left when it stopped at the intersection and entered the roadway. The difference matters when describing the physical circumstances, but neither version supports the claim that the driver directly ordered him to jump. The supported conclusion is that Haire used the opportunity to escape before officers arrested Gills.
Police conducted a felony traffic stop after Haire separated from the vehicle. Gills was taken into custody, and Haire was returned safely to his family. Reports did not describe a serious injury resulting from his exit. Dave Haire later praised his son’s actions, saying he had been afraid but brave. The father’s comments matched what the audio appeared to document: Haire was openly frightened, yet he continued asking questions, communicating his location and watching for police. The recording therefore tells two parts of the story at once — the fear caused by the alleged confinement and the steps Haire took to help bring it to an end.
Dash-camera footage can be powerful evidence, but the publicly aired excerpts are not the same as a complete court record. A prosecutor would still need to authenticate the recording, establish when and how it was made and connect the voices to the people involved. Defense attorneys would be able to examine the complete footage rather than only the portions selected for broadcast. Other evidence could include 911 recordings, family phone logs, helicopter observations, officers’ reports and records showing who owned and controlled the Mini Cooper. None of those materials should be treated as proof of guilt until tested through the legal process.
The available reporting also leaves major gaps. Police have not announced a confirmed motive. No report reviewed for this article established a prior relationship between Haire and Gills. Authorities have not explained how the Mini Cooper was driven after Haire reported his keys missing or why Gills was at that particular gas station. Public accounts said Gills had probation-related issues, and a Mecklenburg County mugshot listing published July 17 referred to two probation violations, one from outside the county. The listing does not determine the outcome of the kidnapping allegations or explain any connection between the matters.
No final disposition of the June 25 charges could be independently confirmed as of July 30. Until the full evidence is presented or the case is otherwise resolved, the dash-camera excerpts remain only part of the record. They nevertheless provide an unusually immediate account of the alleged offense, preserving Haire’s effort to identify the stranger, his insistence that police were nearby and the fear he communicated throughout the drive.
Author note: Last updated July 30, 2026.