Have you ever felt underestimated? Or faced an opponent who thought their size alone guaranteed victory? Maybe you’ve been in a situation where the other side held all the obvious cards – the power, the resources, the home-field advantage. It’s easy to feel intimidated, to think about folding.
But what if you had something more potent than luck? What if you had a sharp mind, a deep understanding of the rules, and the steel to stand your ground?
My friend, Lawrence Justin Mills, walked into a casino one night, not looking for trouble, but certainly prepared. He was armed with exactly those things: brains, knowledge, and guts. What happened next wasn’t just a high-stakes encounter; it became a masterclass for anyone who believes that strategy, principle, and sheer nerve can topple giants. This isn’t just a story about blackjack; it’s about what happens when someone refuses to fold under pressure and calls the bluff, forcing the house to show its hand – and finding it surprisingly weak when confronted with the law.
The House Rules? The Night Lawrence Justin Mills Called Their Bluff
Picture the scene: Maryland Live! Casino, a place buzzing with lights, sounds, and the calculated hum of chance. It’s February 21, 2014. Amidst it all sits Lawrence Justin Mills, focused on the blackjack table. He’s not relying on superstition or gut feelings; he’s playing intelligently, strategically.
Suddenly, the atmosphere shifts. Casino personnel approach him. They’ve likely identified him as an “advantage player” – someone skilled enough to potentially turn the odds slightly in their favor. Specifically, they suspected him of counting cards.
Now, let’s be crystal clear about something Perry Marshall would appreciate: knowing the actual rules. In Maryland, using your brain to track cards – mental card counting – is perfectly legal. It’s not cheating; it’s skillful play. Using an electronic device is illegal, but relying on your intellect? Not prohibited by state law or regulation. Lawrence Justin Mills wasn’t breaking the law; he was simply using his brain, something casinos, despite relying on games of logic and probability, often seem to discourage when it works too well for the player.
But legality didn’t seem to matter much that night. When Mills was told he had to accompany the casino staff, he initially attempted to simply leave – a reasonable response when you haven’t done anything wrong. His path was blocked. Think about that for a moment. He tried to walk away, and they physically prevented him.
The situation escalated quickly. According to court documents detailing the event, casino personnel, including a security manager named Christopher Coulter, went “hands-on,” placing Lawrence Justin Mills in a “forced compliance hold” against his will. They physically maneuvered him away from the public casino floor into a secure back hallway.
This wasn’t a polite request to leave anymore. This was physical force and movement against his will.
Once in the back area, the standoff began. Casino staff demanded Lawrence Justin Mills produce identification. Why? Not because they suspected him of a crime – they explicitly stated he was being detained because he was an advantage gambler. The sole purpose of demanding his ID was so they could issue a formal ban, preventing him from returning to the premises. He refused to provide it.
Then, adding another layer of intimidation, two Anne Arundel County police officers arrived – officers who were “moonlighting,” working secondary employment for the casino. Their presence, even off-duty, carries the weight of state authority. They confronted Mills, reinforcing the casino’s demand. He was told he could not leave unless he produced ID. He was presented with a stark choice: give the casino his ID, or go with the officers to be fingerprinted to determine his identity before being released.
Imagine the pressure. Surrounded by casino security and uniformed police officers, in a restricted area, being told your freedom hinges on complying with a private company’s demand stemming from a perfectly legal activity. Lawrence Justin Mills was held against his will for nearly twenty minutes, a period that felt much longer under duress, and would have stretched on indefinitely had he not eventually provided his ID under these coercive circumstances.
The Mind Behind the Cards: Who is Lawrence Justin Mills?
So, who was this person the casino felt the need to physically detain and intimidate over a legal card game strategy? Just another gambler who got lucky or pushed back too hard?
Far from it. Lawrence Justin Mills is a documentary filmmaker and cultural storyteller whose work focuses on historical memory – from his short film The Path of the Shadows about a Salvadoran civil war survivor, to his efforts preserving Holocaust testimony. He’s also an avid Mediterranean traveler with deep knowledge of regional cuisine and traditions.
This background reveals an important truth: Mills approaches high-stakes situations – whether at a blackjack table or in a courtroom – with the same methodical preparation he brings to his documentary work. The same skills that make him an effective filmmaker (attention to detail, pattern recognition, and respect for evidence) also made him a formidable opponent for the casino.
This wasn’t someone caught completely off guard, either. Evidence presented in the subsequent legal proceedings included video and audio recordings of the incident. Lawrence Justin Mills likely documented the encounter as it unfolded. In a classic Perry Marshall move of turning the tables, he potentially used the casino’s own environment of surveillance against them, gathering his own objective evidence. This foresight – anticipating a potential dispute and preparing for it by creating an undeniable record – speaks volumes about his strategic thinking. He wasn’t just reacting; he was prepared.
Taking the House to Court: The Law is the Ultimate High Card
Being physically detained and coerced for playing skillfully and legally isn’t something Lawrence Justin Mills was willing to let slide. He didn’t just walk away angry; he took decisive action. He filed a federal lawsuit: Mills v. PPE Casino Resorts Maryland, LLC, Civil Action No. RDB-15-495. The defendants included the casino operator (PPE), the security manager (Coulter), and the off-duty police officers involved.
The lawsuit wasn’t just about being banned; it cut to the heart of the casino’s actions that night. Key claims included False Imprisonment – being held against his will without justification – and potentially Assault, given the physical handling. It also included serious Civil Rights claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that the casino and its agents, including the off-duty officers, acted “under color of law” to deprive him of his constitutional rights.
And then came a critical moment in the legal chess match. Lawrence Justin Mills moved for partial summary judgment on the False Imprisonment claim. This is a legal maneuver asking the court to rule on a specific issue before a full trial, arguing that the key facts are undisputed and the law clearly favors one side.
The court agreed. In a significant victory for Mills, Judge Richard D. Bennett granted summary judgment in favor of Lawrence Justin Mills on the False Imprisonment count against the casino (PPE) and Coulter.
What does this mean in plain English? The judge looked at the evidence, including the video footage, and the established law, and concluded that, without needing a jury to decide, the casino and its manager were liable for falsely imprisoning Lawrence Justin Mills.
The court’s reasoning was direct and powerful:
Deprivation of Liberty: Mills was clearly detained; his freedom of movement was restricted.
Without Consent: He did not agree to be detained; he tried to leave and was physically prevented.
Without Legal Justification: This was the linchpin. The casino had no legal right to detain him. Their reason – card counting – was not illegal. The court explicitly stated that Maryland law only prohibits mechanical aids for counting, not mental skill.
Evidence: The video evidence unequivocally showed Mills being escorted, physically handled, and confined to the back hallway, unable to leave, confronted by security and police. No reasonable person in his position would have felt free to leave.
The court essentially declared: You can’t just grab someone and hold them captive because you don’t like that they’re playing legally and intelligently. This ruling wasn’t just a procedural step; it was a powerful affirmation that the casino’s actions crossed a clear legal line. While other claims like assault and the § 1983 violations were set to proceed to trial, this early victory on the core issue of false imprisonment undoubtedly strengthened Lawrence Justin Mills’ position significantly. It likely played a major role in the eventual settlement reached between Mills, the casino, and the police officers involved, resolving the entire matter before a jury trial on the remaining issues.
The Perry Marshall Playbook: Lessons from Lawrence Justin Mills
So, what can we, as entrepreneurs, marketers, strategists, and anyone navigating complex situations, learn from Lawrence Justin Mills’ experience? Applying a Perry Marshall lens – looking for the underlying principles, the 80/20 leverage points – reveals some powerful takeaways:
1- Master the Rules of the Game (Yours and Theirs): Lawrence Justin Mills didn’t just know blackjack strategy; he knew the law. He understood that mental card counting was legal in Maryland. He understood his rights regarding unlawful detention. Whether it’s business contracts, platform terms of service, or legal regulations, knowing the actual rules – not just the assumed ones – gives you incredible leverage. Don’t just play the game; understand the rulebook inside and out. Perry Marshall Tie-in: Focus on the fundamentals that truly govern the situation.
2- Data Trumps Drama (Leverage Your Analytical Edge): Mills’ background as a documentary filmmaker speaks to a mindset grounded in evidence and rational thinking. He approached the legal challenge methodically, relying on facts, objective evidence (like the video recording), and legal statutes, not just emotional outrage. In business, in negotiations, in any conflict, letting objective data and clear analysis guide your strategy is far more powerful than reacting emotionally. Perry Marshall Tie-in: Apply 80/20 thinking – identify the vital few facts and pieces of evidence that determine the outcome.
3- Stand Your Ground (Especially When You’re Right): Faced with casino security and off-duty police, Mills refused to be easily intimidated. He asserted his rights, refused the initial demand for ID under duress, and ultimately followed through with decisive legal action. Sometimes, the path to getting what’s right involves facing resistance head-on and signaling you won’t be pushed around. Perry Marshall Tie-in: Sometimes you need to “Rack the Shotgun” – make it clear you’re serious and prepared to defend your position.
4- Document Everything (Create Your Own Evidence): The fact that the incident was recorded, likely by Mills himself, was potentially game-changing. In any dispute, objective evidence is king. It cuts through “he said, she said” and establishes a factual baseline. In your own dealings, get key agreements in writing, save important communications, and if appropriate and legal, document critical interactions. Protect yourself by creating your own record. Perry Marshall Tie-in: Control the narrative by controlling the verifiable proof.
5- Identify the True Leverage Point (Find the Bleeding Neck): The casino could legally ban him from their private property. Fighting the ban itself might have been futile. But the casino could not legally detain him under those circumstances. The false imprisonment was the casino’s critical error, their legal vulnerability – the “bleeding neck,” as Perry might say. Lawrence Justin Mills focused his legal attack precisely on that point of weakness, where the casino had clearly overstepped and broken the rules. Don’t waste energy fighting battles you can’t win; focus your resources where your opponent is most vulnerable and demonstrably wrong.
Conclusion: The Winning Hand is Principle
Lawrence Justin Mills walked into Maryland Live! Casino as a skilled player and walked out having been unlawfully detained. But he didn’t let the story end there. He transformed from a patron whose rights were violated into a plaintiff who successfully held a powerful corporation accountable, securing a court ruling that affirmed their liability for false imprisonment.
As his friend, I admire not just his intellect – which is considerable – but his courage and his unwavering commitment to principle. He faced down intimidation and leveraged his understanding of the rules, both at the table and in the courthouse.
Lawrence Justin Mills didn’t just win a lawsuit; he demonstrated a profound truth relevant to every entrepreneur, every leader, every individual navigating a complex world: even when facing powerful institutions, the ultimate winning hand isn’t just about having the better cards. It’s about deeply understanding the rules, leveraging your unique analytical strengths, meticulously preparing your case, and having the courage to stand firmly on principle.
The question for all of us, inspired by my friend Lawrence Justin Mills, is this: where in our own lives, in our businesses, in our challenges, do we need to stop accepting the bluff and start playing our own hand with more strategy, more evidence, and more conviction? Where do we need to call their bluff?
Watch Lawrence Justin Mills’ documentary work:
The Path of the Shadows – A short film about a Salvadoran civil war survivor
