CBS Miami’s Joan Murray reports on the ongoing trial for former police officer Nouman Raja, who shot and killed Corey Jones on the side of the road in October of 2015.

As the 911 call begins, then-Palm Beach Gardens Police Officer Nouman Raja yells an expletive and is heard screaming for a man to drop the “gun right now!”

With Wednesday’s release of Raja’s 911 call, it’s the first time his voice is heard in a recording from the night he shot and killed stranded motorist Corey Jones, 31.

Palm Beach Gardens police released the recording from Oct. 18 in response to a nearly nine-month-old records request from the news media, allowing the public to hear the real-time conversation between Raja and the 911 operator.

During his 911 call, Raja must have known Jones had already dropped his gun, according to prosecutors. Raja phoned 911 about 33 seconds after the officer fired his final shot. And prosecutors said there’s sufficient evidence to conclude Raja had kept discharging his firearm at Jones after realizing Jones no longer had a gun.

Paid Post LEARN MORE
Want to See the Best Fall Colors? Here’s Where to Go
Want to See the Best Fall Colors? Here’s Where to Go
As the weather turns from hot and humid to crisp and breezy, nature brings on some amazing colors.

SPONSORED CONTENT BY the BuyPower Card
Raja is on house arrest on a $250,000 bond after being charged last month with manslaughter by culpable negligence and attempted first-degree murder with a firearm. A grand jury that examined the evidence — and may have heard the 911 call — found the use of force was unjustified.

911 recording in Corey Jones police shooting released; ‘I just shot one person,’ officer says
Near the start of the call from his personal cellphone, Raja reported he “got one down. I just shot one person.” He also said he was calling from an Interstate 95 southbound off ramp where he had parked his unmarked van before approaching Jones.

“Are you all right?” the male dispatcher asks.

“Yeah man, I’m good, I’m good,” replies Raja, who then about 27 seconds into the recording suddenly again yells, “drop the g…”

“Get me some units, I’ve lost contact with him, I don’t know where he is,” said Raja, who was not wearing his uniform. That night the officer had been assigned to patrol parking lots in response to vehicle burglaries.

Officer who shot Corey Jones should have worn police vest to ID himself, co-workers say

Officer who shot Corey Jones should have worn police vest to ID himself, co-workers say

Evidence in the Nouman Raja case was released Tuesday by prosecutors

Prosecutors release recording of Corey Jones’ final words in police shooting

“Alright, you got it buddy,” the operator answered.

Throughout the call, the unidentified operator repeatedly called Raja “buddy” while giving him instructions and asking for a description of the man he had just shot.

“Black male wearing all black, dreads, had a silver handgun in his right hand. I came out, I saw him come out with a handgun. I gave him commands. I identified myself and he turned, pointed the gun at me and started running. I shot him,” Raja said, before walking back to the van where he had left his police radio.

The Palm Beach Gardens Police Department, which fired the 38-year-old officer less than a month after he killed Jones, noted that before releasing the 911 call, it consulted with the Palm Beach County State Attorney’s Office.

It also said it edited out a portion of the call where Raja identified himself to the operator, because of the state’s public records law.

A second 911 recording also was released Wednesday. A female staying at the nearby DoubleTree hotel reported hearing gunshots outside her window.

“There’s a guy walking backwards, holding a gun,” the woman said, later adding that it was difficult to see because of trees blocking her view. The call ends with sirens as police arrive at the scene.

Attorneys for the family of Jones, a musician whose SUV had broken down on the way back home from a band performance, said in a statement the recordings don’t tell the story of what actually happened to their beloved son and brother from Boynton Beach.

The family points to a different recording called key to Raja’s prosecution: Jones’ cellphone call to roadside assistance during the 3:15 a.m. shooting.

Prosecutors have not yet released that recording, but they have described its contents and said it helps prove Jones’ death resulted from Raja’s “culpably negligent actions.”

In their report, investigators wrote that Raja did not identify himself as a police officer and he kept shooting, even after a “frightened” Jones ran away and longer held his licensed .380-caliber handgun. Jones’ gun was not fired.

“The release of today’s 911 tapes by Officer Raja and an unidentified witness, further proves that Raja’s narrative of what occurred on the early morning hours of October 18th is inconsistent with the objective evidence,” attorneys Daryl Parks, Benjamin Crump, Kweku Darfoor and Skinner Louis wrote in a news release.

Representing Jones’ estate and his father, Clinton Jones Sr., the attorneys on Wednesday filed a wrongful death civil lawsuit against Raja and the city of Palm Beach Gardens.

The claim for unspecified financial damages came less than two hours after the release of the 911 recordings. The lawsuit does not cite Raja’s 911 call, but it quotes the roadside assistance call transcript provided by prosecutors and contends Jones was “peacefully” waiting in his SUV and “posed no reasonable threat of physical harm” to the officer.

Jones “was not in the commission of any crime, and was in need of protection as he was stranded on the side of the I-95 with a disabled vehicle, when Defendant Raja shot him multiple times killing him. The use of force was unreasonable and clearly excessive,” the lawsuit states.

Richard Lubin, lead attorney for Raja, declined to comment Wednesday about the 911 recording.

Palm Beach County’s police union, which is helping to defend Raja, supports Raja’s statements in the 911 call about identifying himself as a cop.

After Raja was arrested and charged, the union said: “it is upsetting that a police officer — met by a subject who points a firearm at him — is not legally allowed to defend himself while in fear for his life.”

Raja has pleaded not guilty. His next court date is July 14.

Staff writer Adam Sacasa contributed to this report. mfreeman@sunsentinel.com, 561-243-6642 or Twitter @MarcJFreeman

SOURCE: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/palm-beach/fl-palm-beach-gardens-nouman-raja-911-audio-20160706-story.html

Read The Palm Beach Post’s complete coverage of Corey Jones’ shooting, MyPalmBeachPost.com/coreyjones

An audio recording of the controversial shooting of Corey Jones by a Palm Beach Gardens police officer six months ago does exist, The Palm Beach Post has learned, and it doesn’t completely match what the officer told investigators.

The recording comes from an AT&T roadside assistance line that Jones called several times from inside his broken-down SUV in the early morning of Oct. 18.

Investigators were able to recover one of the calls, which Jones dialed five minutes before he was shot and killed by plainclothes officer Nouman Raja, according to a person with knowledge of the incident.

The recorded call lasted 53 minutes before, during and after the incident, AT&T phone logs show.

It’s unclear how Raja’s statement differs from the recording, but it has raised concerns among investigators, The Post’s source said.

The case is expected to be finished soon and turned over to Palm Beach County State Attorney Dave Aronberg, who will have to make a decision on whether to charge Raja with a crime, present the case to a grand jury or not charge Raja. The recording, combined with Raja’s statement, could be critical to that decision.

State Attorney spokesman Mike Edmondson wouldn’t confirm or deny the existence of the recording, which wouldn’t become public record until the case is closed or until it becomes part of discovery in a criminal trial.

“All we can say is that it is an ongoing investigation,” Edmondson said Wednesday.

Jones, 31, was shot three times by Raja after the officer, who was on-duty but not in uniform, suddenly pulled in front of him in an unmarked van on an Interstate 95 off-ramp.

Raja told investigators that he had to shoot Jones because Jones came at him with a gun. He fired six shots. Evidence shows Jones never fired the weapon.

Raja was fired a few weeks later.

A week after the shooting, The Post reported first that Jones was on hold while awaiting a tow truck. Law enforcement officials would not say whether they had checked at that time with AT&T for the existence of a recording, but AT&T said it was cooperating with police.

The fact that a recording exists was not publicly known until now.

Jones’ family, who had been briefed by the the state attorney’s office on some details of the case, didn’t know the recording existed, they said Wednesday.

“I hope that it works in our favor,” Jones’ father, Clinton Jones Sr., said Wednesday when told of the recording. “I just want the truth to come out. I’m looking forward to it.”

Raja’s lawyer, Richard Lubin, declined to comment.

Jones made multiple calls to family members and AT&T’s roadside assistance line, #HELP, after his car stalled on the Interstate 95 off-ramp to PGA Boulevard on his way back from a gig.

Jones, a building manager for the Delray Beach Housing Authority, was also a drummer.

The last call to AT&T was at 3:10 a.m., five minutes before he was shot and killed by Raja. It’s unclear whether investigators received all of the calls Jones made to the recorded line.

The investigation is being led by the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office and includes three other law enforcement agencies, including the FBI. Prosecutors said they have interviewed more than 100 potential witnesses spanning 30 states and three countries. In the days after the shooting, the FBI was also called out to search the scene for more evidence.

The shooting received national attention, and there have been multiple protests in front of Aronberg’s office — most recently on Monday — urging him to charge Raja with a crime.

Adding to the pressure, Aronberg is up for re-election this year, although nobody has yet declared to run against him before the May 7 qualifying deadline.

Aronberg could choose to directly file charges against Raja or not, or leave the decision up to a grand jury, where the proceedings are secret. A third option, to take the case before a coroner’s inquest, hasn’t been used since 2005.

Prosecutors in Palm Beach County haven’t charged an officer in a shooting since at least 2000.

Kweku Darfoor, one of the attorneys for Jones’ family, reiterated that Jones’ family believes he would have followed any orders Raja gave him had he known Raja was a police officer.

“We believe that whatever comes out will show that Corey is exactly who we knew him to be, and that he did nothing wrong,” Darfoor said. “Now we’re finally getting a bit of information, but still waiting for the whole truth to come out.”

SOURCE: http://www.mypalmbeachpost.com/news/crime–law/source-audio-recording-corey-jones-slaying-cop-exists/hPmt8APimQZLKsWZTJSJ0K/

Attorneys Kweku Darfoor, of Darfoor Law Firm, and Benjamin Crump, of Parks & Crump, appearing on NewOneNow Roland Martin show to discuss the audio tape release in the shooting death of Corey Jones case.

What is Odometer Fraud, Salvage Fraud, Undisclosed Flood or Hurricane Damage?

Odometer Fraud occurs when the dealer or the dealer’s representative (salesman) gives misinterpretations about the motor vehicle’s actual mileage information; for example, a car with 75,000 miles being set and sold at 25,000 miles. Salvage Fraud is when a car is being sold after it has been declared a total loss due to such things like a car collision or anything of a serious matter. Undisclosed flood or Hurricane Damage is similar to Salvage Fraud; moreover, selling a car after total loss due to hurricane or flood damage. All of these types of automobile fraud, including, but not limited to, hiding and misinterpreting an automobile’s actual condition and the real value violate the federal statute of Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act (MVICSA). They also violate the State of Florida FDUTPA (Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act), and can ultimately result in revocation, installments payments withholding, and ultimately a lawsuit regardless of the seller’s position in knowing the fraud facts upon the vehicle.

The EB-5 visa for Immigrant Investors is a U.S. visa created by the Immigration Act 1990. This visa provides a means to obtain a green card for foreigners who invest money in the U.S. The first stipulation to obtaining the visa requires an individual to invest $1,000,000 (or at least $500,000 in a “Targeted Employment Area” – high unemployment or rural area), which creates or preserves at least 10 jobs for U.S. workers, with the exclusion of the investor and their immediate family.

Currently, a new Pilot Program allows for investments to be made directly in a job-generating commercial enterprise (new, or existing – “Troubled Business”), or a “Regional Center” – a 3rd party-managed investment vehicle (private or public). The responsibility of creating the requisite jobs will fall on the 3rd party. Contact a knowledgeable U.S. immigration lawyer to guide you through the creation of a regional center.

So how does it work for the foreign investor and their family? If the investor’s petition is approved, the investor and their dependents will be granted conditional permanent residence which shall be valid for two years. Accordingly, within the 90 day period before the conditional permanent residence expires, the investor must submit evidence documenting that the full required investment has been made and that 10 jobs have been maintained, or 10 jobs have been created or will be created within a reasonable time period.

The EB-5 visa has traditionally been underutilized by foreign investors. However, the popularity of the immigrant investor visa has been steadily picking up in the last few years, after a few tweaks by the U.S. government. To gain additional information, contact a U.S. immigration lawyer.

Introduction

In its recent decision in the case of Felix Klomega v The Attorney General and others, the Supreme Court in Ghana has provided much needed guidance to the international community when looking to contract with the Ghanaian government or government entities.

The facts

The claimant, a citizen and tax payer of Ghana, brought proceedings in the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of a concession agreement and an associated shareholders agreement for the design, construction and, thereafter, operation of the container terminal at the port of Tema, Ghana for 20 years.

The concession was granted to Meridian Port Services Limited (MPS) by the Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority (GPHA).

MPS is a Ghanaian company, being a joint venture between Meridian Port Holdings Limited (MPH) and the GPHA, with MPH being the majority shareholder.

MPH is an English company, being a joint venture between leading container terminal operators APM Terminals and Bolloré Africa Logistics.

The GPHA is a statutory corporation established under the Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority Act, 1986 (PNDCL 160).

The GPHA, MPS and MPH were named as defendants in the proceedings, along with the Attorney General of Ghana.

The issues in the case

The claimant relied on article 181(5) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana (the Constitution), which requires any “international business or economic transaction” to which the government is a party be authorised by parliament.

The claimant’s contention was that the expression “government” included a state entity such as the GPHA and that, as a result, the concession and shareholders’ agreements should be declared null and void for want of parliamentary authorisation.

The defendants’ principal arguments were that the GPHA could not be included within the definition of government because (i) it had been set up as a separate legal entity from central government under PNDCL 160; (ii) its operations were commercial in nature and did not, therefore, require parliamentary approval; and (iii) it is a government agency as distinct from an organ of government.

If, contrary to the position of the GPHA, MPS and MPH, the GPHA was deemed to be within the definition of government, the court was asked to determine whether the concession agreement and the shareholders’ agreement were, in any event, “international business or economic transactions” for the purposes of article 181(5) of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court’s decision

On 19 July 2013, the nine Justices of the Supreme Court delivered a unanimous decision dismissing the claimant’s action.

In doing so, the court only decided the principal issue as to whether the GPHA came within the meaning of government, and held that:

The cumulative points made by the defendants above amount to an irresistible case that in the context of article 181(5) and the facts of this case, the 2nd defendant [the GPHA] is not to be regarded as coming within the meaning of “Government”.

The Supreme Court went on to hold that:

“…to subject statutory corporations…” with commercial functions to the Parliamentary approval process prescribed in article 181(5) would probably increase the weight of Parliament’s responsibilities in this regard to an unsustainable level. Accordingly, it is reasonable to infer that the framers of the 1992 Constitution did not intend such a result.

In the court’s view, government should mean, ordinarily, the central government and not operationally autonomous agencies of government, and interpreting that word purposively it should exclude the operations of the GPHA.

The Supreme Court did, however, state that its decision did not lay down an absolute rule. For instance, article 181(5) may still apply on the particular facts of a case if central government was found to have made a particular statutory corporation its alter ego.

As to the “international” nature of the concession and shareholders agreements, the court stated that:

Although these other issues raised by the parties are tantalizingly interesting, we will refrain from commenting on them or deciding them, since that is not necessary for the determination of this case.

Concluding remarks

This is the fifth time the Supreme Court has been asked to interpret article 181(5) of the Constitution.

In the light of this significant body of law, in this last case the court stated that it has laid the foundation for determining the provision’s meaning with some predictability.

So, in the future, if there is an issue as to whether article 181(5) applies or not, parties must ask the High Court to decide the point rather requesting an interpretation from the Supreme Court. This would include dealing with issues such as whether a contract is with the “government” and, if so, whether it is an “international business or economic transaction” such that parliamentary approval is required.

When contracting with the Ghanaian government or government entities, it is vital that contracting entities give due consideration and take legal advice as to the possible application of article 181(5). A failure to do so could have significant ramifications.

If the conclusion is that a party is going to be contracting with the “government” and the contract in question is an “international business or economic transaction”, parliamentary approval will be required. If so, this requirement will need to be factored into the timeline leading to contract closing.

There are a few things you must decide when you start your business. One of the first few decisions will be the entity structure of your organization. You must decide whether it will be a sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation, or limited liability company (LLC). (If you need a brief explanation of the main business types, see http://www.sba.gov/category/navigation-structure/starting-managing-business/starting-business/choose-your-business-stru)

The business structure which is right for your business depends on the type of business you operate, number of owners, and its financial position. No one choice is perfect for every business: Business owners must choose the structure that best meets their goals. This article introduces several of the most important factors to consider, including:

• the potential risks and liabilities of your business
• the formalities and expenses involved in establishing and maintaining the various business structures
• your income tax situation
• your investment needs.

Risks and Liabilities

The best ownership structure for your business is largely dependent on the type of services or products it will offer. If your business will engage in inherent risky business activities— for example, trading stocks or repairing roofs — you’ll most likely want to form a business structure that separates your personal liability from the business’ liability (“limited liability”), which shields your personal assets from business debts and claims. A corporation or a limited liability company (LLC) is likely the best structure for your business.

Again, to learn more about the advantages and disadvantages of each type of business structure, please refer to http://www.sba.gov/category/navigation-structure/starting-managing-business/starting-business/choose-your-business-stru

Formalities and Expenses

The simplest structures to set up are undoubtedly sole proprietorships and partnerships — you don’t have to file any special forms or pay any fees to start your business. Additionally, there are not any special operating rules that must be adhered to.

On the other hand, LLCs and corporations are almost always more expensive to create and more difficult to maintain. To form an LLC or corporation, you must file a document with the state and pay a fee, which can range (typically $40 to $800); depending on the state your business is formed. Keep in mind that, owners of corporations and LLCs must elect officers (usually, a president, vice president, and secretary) that manage the company’s affairs. They are also tasked with keeping important business records and other formalities.

If your business is beginning on a shoestring, it may be economically better to form the simplest type of business — a sole proprietorship (for one-owner businesses) or a partnership (for businesses with more than one owner). However, if your business will take on any form of risks that could expose you to potential lawsuits, the limited personal liability provided by an LLC or a corporation may be worth the cost and paperwork required to create and operate one.

Income Taxes

Owners of sole proprietorships, partnerships, and LLCs all pay taxes on business profits in the same way. The IRS refers to these three business types as “pass-through” tax entities, which means that all of the profits and losses pass through the business to the owners, who report their share of the profits (or deduct their share of the losses) on their personal tax returns. Therefore, sole proprietors, partners, and LLC owners can expect roughly the same amount of tax complexity, paperwork, and costs.

Owners of these unincorporated businesses must pay income taxes on ALL net profits of the business. This is regardless of how much they actually take out of the business for the given year. Consider that even if all of the profits are kept in the business checking account to meet upcoming business expenses, the owners must report their share of these profits as income on their individual tax returns.

Contrast this to the owners of a corporation that do not report their shares of corporate profits on their personal tax returns. These owners pay taxes only on profits they actually receive (salaries, bonuses, and dividends).

Keep in mind that the corporation itself pays taxes, at special corporate tax rates, on any profits that are left in the company from year to year (called “retained earnings”). Furthermore, corporations also have to pay taxes on dividends paid out to shareholders. However, small corporations rarely pay dividends so they are largely unaffected by this tax burden.

This separate level of taxation makes it quite a bit more complex to filing and paying taxes for corporations, but it can be a benefit to many businesses. For instance, owners of a corporation don’t have to pay personal income taxes on profits they don’t actually receive. How does this happen? For example, take a corporation that earned up to $75,000 in one year; because corporations enjoy a lower tax rate than most individuals for the first $50,000 to $75,000 of corporate income, a corporation and its owners may actually have a lower combined tax bill than the owners of an unincorporated business that earns the same amount of profit. This is just one of the benefits of the corporate entity. It is recommended that you contact your Ft. Lauderdale small business attorney to discuss your business entity and formation when are you setting up your business.

Investment Needs

The corporate structure is the only business structure that allows a business to sell ownership shares in the company through its stock offerings. This added advantage to corporations allows them to attract investment capital and to hire and retain key employees by enticing them with employee stock options.

However, for businesses that don’t need to issue stock options and will never “go public,” forming a corporation may not be worth the added expense. If it’s solely for limited liability, an LLC provides the same protection as a corporation, but the simplicity and flexibility of LLCs offer a clear advantage over corporations. For more help on choosing between a corporation and an LLC, read http://www.sba.gov/category/navigation-structure/starting-managing-business/starting-business/choose-your-business-stru. For assistance in setting up your business entity, contact a trusted Margate business attorney at Darfoor Law Firm, P.A.

We are pleased to announce that Kweku Darfoor, managing shareholder at Darfoor Law Firm, P.A., has been selected to the 2021 Florida Super Lawyers Rising Stars list. This is an exclusive list, recognizing no more than two and a half percent of attorneys in the state. Super Lawyers, part of Thomson Reuters, is a research-driven, peer-influenced rating service of outstanding lawyers who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. Attorneys are selected from more than 70 practice areas and all firm sizes, assuring a credible and relevant annual list.

The annual selections are made using a patented multiphase process that includes:

• Peer nominations

• Independent research by Super Lawyers

• Evaluations from a highly credentialed panel of attorneys

The objective of Super Lawyers is to create a credible, comprehensive, and diverse listing of exceptional attorneys to be used as a resource for both referring attorneys and consumers seeking legal counsel. The Super Lawyers lists are published nationwide in Super Lawyers Magazines and in leading city and regional magazines and newspapers across the country, as well as the Florida Super Lawyers Digital Magazine. Please join us in congratulating Kweku Darfoor on his selection.