Posted in Cop Shows

Why Police Don’t Touch Your Taillight, It’s Extremely Insignificant!

   04/30/2021  32 Comments on Why Police Don’t Touch Your Taillight, It’s Extremely Insignificant!

Install Raid for Free ✅ IOS: https://clik.cc/jFaYU
✅ ANDROID: https://clik.cc/RQQhu  
Start with💰50K silver and get a Free Epic Champion 💥 on day 7 of “New Player Rewards” program.
 —-
 INTRO MUSIC: “Wolfhunter” by Forensic.

** (Disclaimer: This video content is intended for educational and informational purposes only) **

Author: phillynews215

HOSTING BY PHILLYFINESTSERVERSTAT | ANGELHOUSE © 2009 - 2024 | ALL YOUTUBE VIDEOS IS A REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF GOOGLE INC. THE YOUTUBE CHANNELS AND BLOG FEEDS IS MANAGED BY THERE RIGHTFUL OWNERS. POST QUESTION OR INQUIRIES SEND ME AN EMAIL TO PHILLYNEWSNOW215@GMAIL.COM (www.phillynewsnow.com)
Website Twitter

32 thoughts on “Why Police Don’t Touch Your Taillight, It’s Extremely Insignificant!”

  1. For those who INSIST that it's a fantastic evidence tool to touch the tail light, I'm curious if you can find a case or cases where a cop killer or shooter was charged and convicted with a taillight fingerprint as evidence. Not being sarcastic here..I looked and haven't found anything solid at this point. *Update: please pay attention to what I actually say, not what you assume without watching. I'm NOT saying no cops do this lol. Also, comment away but I'll be waiting for the case to be sent to me to review 🙂

  2. I have seen dash camera video that showed an officer touch a taillight. It was said that in case the car takes off. He can prove he already stopped the car before.

  4. Evidence Techs aren’t checking the entire car for prints…if you’ve got a dead cop and a vehicle description…it gives you one place to check a suspect vehicle other than drivers side door. How many finger prints are going to find on a taillight…the owners probably haven’t even touched their own taillight. Environmental considerations aside, if the vehicle was the vehicle involved there probably won’t be but one set of prints. It WAS a thing as well as checking to make sure the trunk was latched. Your just too young to have been trained on this…you were never a cop prior to having video. Again, environmental conditions alone may prevent the recovery of prints, but think about vehicle description as the only lead, the license plate ran doesn’t match, etc. Officers come upon an abandoned vehicle a week later matching description and have it towed, what harm does checking in left rear taillight for the officers prints do? Now we know it was involved and needs further processing to identify suspect(s). Now think of a dark remote stretch of highway in Wyoming, lone deputy, no back up for literally 50+ miles, no video, no witnesses, no vehicle description. L.E. in a neighboring jurisdiction pull video from gas stations and come across some suspicious folks, get a plate. Contact yet another out of state jurisdiction where registered owner resides, find out it was stolen. It is found in yet another jurisdiction where it is treated as simply another recovered stolen vehicle, but we know it was at least near the jurisdiction where the deputy was slain. It would be a simple request to check for the deputies prints on the vehicle at the drivers side door or the rear of the vehicle. What else have you got pre DNA and pre video? And even today? The video system malfunctions…that never happens, right? DNA test compromised, again that never happens? And what harm is one additional piece of recognized evidence to prove the vehicle was the one in the encounter? We used to start fires with a rock…still can, but choose not to because of technological advances. Those advances don’t negate the rock in a pinch. Touching the taillight, trunk, drivers (or now passenger) side door are not negated by technology, they are simply not as necessary as they once were. I urge you to really stop and think about the above described scenario, and tell me how you’re going to solve the murder of that deputy back then. I’ll wait😁 You wanted solved cases where a finger print was used as evidence to solve the homicide, I can find none because other evidence was available, but to suggest finger print evidence wasn’t used in the prosecution I think would be naive. There are several unsolved cases of officer homicides in which I think finger print evidence was over looked…some on the street (patrol), but I’m not remembering a traffic stop example off the top of my head. If I can remember I’ll let you know. Again, what harm is “another nail in the coffin” when others may loosen prior to court? Would you disregard a drop of the deputy’s blood found on the car? Pre DNA? The finger print evidence would’ve been more definitive than the blood prior to DNA development. Wow, this was way longer than I thought my reply was going to be😬

  5. I was pulled over twice in my life, once because they were looking for a silver Honda Civic in the area and mine was one (I was let go after a few quick questions revealed I wasn't whoever they were looking for,) and once for speeding (my wife was late for work, I was let off with a warning.) Neither cop touched my taillight.

  8. I watch those real world police videos all the time and it seems like most officers actually do that.. I was told it was because the second reason to have a fingerprint or leave DNA etc which I didn't really understand so yeah just what I've heard and seen. Hope everyone has a good day and if you're watching this now have a wonderful day Mike no longer the cop

  9. I'm not saying that touching a tail light is a viable way of creating evidence, or has any practical value, but that's not what you asked. You asked if officers do it or not. People do things all the time for silly reasons, both in their professional and personal lives. From what I can tell this is a common practice, but admittedly it seems to depend on who you ask and what department they work for. Another instance where Mike seems to think he speaks for every police officer hither, thither, and yon, despite the wide array of variables which exist between locales.

  11. Doing something as simple as touching the tail light is easy and can provide a good amount of information

  13. At the point where tapping the taillight would provide evidence theres already enough evidence to find the vehicle and likely the driver. Like camera footage.

  16. So weird. I’ve been pulled over twice in my life, both by Colorado State Patrol and both times, the Trooper touched my taillight. Well, one touched the taillight the other touched my tailgate, but still. And I have a few cop friends who I asked about it and they said exactly what you said, never done it, never taught to do it, don’t know anyone who does it. How strange

  20. It was never officially taught but suggested that tapping the tail light gave you that extra time to settle your nerves; especially if you had raised adrenalin

  21. I have no idea why, but I've had numerous officers do this. In numerous different states, west coast, east coast, and in the middle. I just want to know why?! IT ACTUALLY HAPPENS! This is not in the distant past. Maybe not every officer, but yes, it is very, very common. The officers who do this seem to be the most paranoid types…I'm not sure if that is related or not.

    I do agree some of the reasons you describe are stupid, but yours isn't anymore accurate.
    (Just for the record, I drive across the country constantly, and have been pulled over more times than I can remember, but never had a ticket in my life)

  22. I just got pulled over last night by a pretty cool police officer. I watched him touch my driver side taillight… It may not mean anything, but it definitely happens lol

  23. it is one of them who trained who and who came up with the policy for what reason… If you EOD trained you never touch anything that could move. i hate when i see cops touch tail lights. i think of "DID YOU CHECK FOR EXPLOSIVES boom"…. but then you have some weird departments with some crappy liberal arts school training to touch the tail light so if you are shot and killed you have the car tagged with finger prints for evidence… it mostly started from some movies and TV shows… and you forgot about the "checking if the trunk is latched" no they are not checking if the trunk is latched. if someone was in the trunk of the car they can open it. they have handles required by law so that if a person is in the trunk they can open it… if the cop was afraid of someone in the trunk they would not go past that point they would call for back up and have the People in the care come to them one at a time.

  24. Bright side isn't a very good channel. Almost every single topic they've ever gone over in all of their videos are false. They make really low effort content that spreads misinformation about basic things. Not to mention that they're a scummy company

  25. You can see videos on Youtube posted by the police that show them touching the taillight. It would be fun to lift the print the from the taillight then go to a gun range and pick up some used brass, then place the print on the spent brass. Listen to the police scanner and next time there is a case of police looking for a perp after gunshots are fired, toss the shell across the police tape.
    That would be fun.

  29. Ive seen this done to my vehicle on many different stops. I was told its because if I shot the cop, and drove off. If they found my car later they could connect the car to the shooting. I wish no ill will to anyone. Just my 2 cents

Comments are closed.