A 19-year-old New Jersey man will appear in court Monday after being charged with shaking his girlfriend's baby to death, according to the Atlantic County Prosecutor's Office.

Daquan Davis is charged with manslaughter and endangering the welfare of a child.

Police say Davis was caring for the 6-month-old infant Friday morning at School House Apartments on North Martin Luther King Boulevard in Atlantic City, N.J., while the child’s mother was at work.

Police say when she returned home around 4 a.m., she found her son unresponsive and called police. The baby was pronounced dead. Investigators believe Davis shook the baby, causing his death.

In an NBC10 exclusive interview, the child’s mother, Ebony Stewart, described the horrific discovery she made when she returned home.

“I noticed my son wasn’t breathing. I looked closer and he wasn’t breathing. His face was purple and frozen cold.”

Stewart said Davis acted as if nothing had happened.

“He sat there saying, 'Everything will be alright …We’re in this together … I know you’re hurting. I am here for you,'" Stewart said.

One of the woman's neighbors appeared rattled by the news: "I live in this building, and that same little baby, just two weeks ago, I told the mom how cute the baby was. And just to hear this, right now, I don't know what to think, I really don't,” Lloyd Phillips told NBC's Atlantic City affiliate.

Seven people have been arrested and warrants were issued for two others in a lottery scam that targeted elderly people across the United States, NBCConnecticut.com reported.

Police in Stamford, Conn., have so far identified 31 victims from across the United States, mostly between 80 and 90 years old. Police have documented losses in excess of $165,000.

Police said the ring, based in Fairfield County, contacted victims by telephone or letter, telling them that they had won a prize, police said.

Before collecting any supposed winnings, the victims were told that they would have to pay taxes or fees and send money through Western Union or U.S. Postal Service money orders.

The money was then transferred to Costa Rica.

Victims who did send the money received additional phone calls telling them there was an issue and that they would need to send even more money before they could receive their prize.

The calls continue until the victim ran out of money or realized that he or she had been scammed, police said.


Police said they have obtained nine arrest warrants.

Police have arrested Tiffany Midgette, 32, of Stamford, Kinika Harvey, 28, of Bridgeport, and Stephanie Handy, 35, of Stamford.

They were charged with racketeering, money laundering in the third degree, larceny in the first degree, second-degree larceny, conspiracy at larceny in the first degree, conspiracy at larceny in the second degree and criminal attempt at larceny in the second degree.

Bond for Midgette and Harvey was set at $150,000, while bond for Handy was set at $125,000.

Kimberly Midgette, 31, of Stamford, Rannisha Fullmore, 27, of Stamford, Keneeta Washington, 30, of Stamford, and Aisha Jones, 27, of Stamford, were charged with larceny in the first degree, larceny in the second degree, money laundering in the third degree, conspiracy at larceny in the first degree and conspiracy at larceny in the second degree.

Being the only woman not a family member to ever record a duet with Michael Jackson (Barbra Streisand, Whitney Houston and Aretha Franklin all turned down such opportunity) may be the most notable distinction of the Grammy-winning singer/songwriter Siedah Garrett.

She did so with her 1987 #1 Billboard hit “I Just Can’t Stop Loving You,” but it certainly is not the only one. Since being discovered by the legendary producer/band leader Quincy Jones in 1983, Garrett has also managed to become the only Black female in Academy Award history to be nominated twice for Original Song written for a Motion Picture for “Real In Rio” – 2011 film “Rio” and “Love You, I Do,” from the 2006 film “Dreamgirls.” (For the latter Garrett won a Grammy Award.)

She is also the only female to write a #1 song recorded by Michael Jackson with “Man In The Mirror.” Many have felt that Siedah’s successful association with the King of Pop on two single hits on MJ’s record-breaking “Bad” album in 1985 may have been too much for any artist to come out of Jackson’s shadow and launch a solo career. Too much expectation may have been there for Garrett to transition into stardom, even on her own highly rated merits.

Siedah Garrett and Michael Jackson in the 1980s

Though Garrett has had other hits on a duet with Dennis Edwards (Temptations) in 1984 with “Don’t Look Any Further” and success with The Brand New Heavies (briefly replacing N’dea Davenport) on their 1997 “Shelter” album, over her almost 30 years in the recording industry, Garrett has only released two solo albums to date, “Kiss of Life” in 1988 and “Siedah” in 2003, both mild successes.

But that statistic will soon change with the upcoming October release of Siedah’s third solo project “The Answer’s Always Love” leading with its first single “Keep On Loving You,” a tribute to Jackson, in mid-September. Garrett has explained that “Keep On Loving You” is her way to publicly and musically pay homage and respect to and show love for Michael.

The single’s release comes just prior to a number of Michael Jackson-related projects: on September 18th comes the release of Michael Jackson’s “Bad 25,” which celebrates the original groundbreaking album’s silver anniversary; then later in the fall comes the corresponding Jackson behind-the-scenes documentary of the making of “Bad” directed by Spike Lee.

Garrett has recently had opportunity to share her personal and professional experiences with Jackson at two breakfast events held in New York and Los Angeles, respectively. In New York, Siedah met with members of Michael’s Official Fan Club, and in Los Angeles she held her own MJ breakfast at Westlake Recording Studio where their duet was recorded with the audience of their mutual fans. The latter event also gave fans an opportunity to first hear the final edit of “Keep On Loving You” prior to its release.

When Walter Samaszko Jr. died at his home in Carson City, Nev., he had $200 in a bank account. But as officials later discovered, Samaszko had about $7 million stored neatly around his home, the Nevada Appeal reported.

In late June, neighbors called authorities because of a smell emanating from Samaszko’s home. He was a recluse who had told them he hated the government and feared getting shots, but still, it had been a while since they had seen him, according to the Appeal.

According to the coroner, Samaszko, 69, had been dead for at least a month. He died of heart problems, the Las Vegas Sun reported.

In came the cleanup crews, which discovered boxes of gold in the garage.

“At that point, we took the house apart,” said Carson City clerk-recorder Alan Glover.

They found gold coins and bullion, tiny dos-pesos, $20 gold pieces, Austrian ducats, Kruggerrands and English Sovereigns dating  to the 1840s – enough gold to fill two wheelbarrows.

Samaszko and his mother had lived in the three-bedroom home since the 1970s, which is around the time they started collecting gold. Glover told the Appeal that the two kept detailed records of the gold they had purchased.


As for who can lay claim to the riches -- Glover said the Internal Revenue Service will take a sizable amount in taxes -- about $750,000 -- and that the rest will likely go to a first cousin, a substitute teacher in San Rafael, Calif., who is Samaszko's only relative as far as authorities can tell.

The Las Vegas Sun reported that Glover's office found her using a list of people who had attended Samaszko's mother's funeral.

Jeffrey Toobin's latest book portrays Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia as increasingly cranky and partisan — and infuriated with Chief Justice John Roberts over the court's recent decisions on healthcare and immigration.

Toobin, who writes for The New Yorker and also covers the court for CNN, credits Scalia for a sea change in how both sides of the political spectrum think about the law. But he says the justice's bombast has become off-putting to more even-tempered colleagues.

Toobin's latest book, "The Oath," chronicling the Roberts court and the Obama presidency, is being released today. Here are 5 key takeaways:

Scalia 'furious' over healthcare and immigration

The book confirms previous reports that Roberts changed his vote in the landmark case over President Obama's healthcare law after initially siding with the conservative justices. But Toobin reports — as others have implied — that what pushed Roberts away was the conservative justices' insistence on striking down the entire health law.

"Scalia's view of the justices as gladiators against the president unnerved Roberts," Toobin writes.

The book describes Scalia as "furious" and "enraged" at Roberts — contradicting Scalia's public statements brushing aside any tensions.

Toobin's book says Scalia has become fixated more on politics — and particularly on Obama — than on legal scholarship, saying frustration over the healthcare ruling helped fuel his acerbic statement dissenting from the court's decision on Arizona's immigration law.

"Scalia was indeed unhappy with the immigration decision, but the splenetic excess of his Arizona opinion owed far more to his failure (as yet unknown to the public) in the health care case," the book says.

White House didn't consider State of the Union fallout

Republicans criticized President Obama for disagreeing with the Citizens United ruling in his 2010 State of the Union address. But no one in the White House had even considered the risk of publicly disagreeing with the court.

"During the discussions in Emanuel's office, as well as the president's own prep sessions, the propriety of challenging the Supreme Court had never come up," Toobin writes. "The group was so focused on pushing Obama's agenda that the issue of the justices' presence seems not to have occurred to anyone. The administration's anger about Citizens United was such that (even though no one said this specifically) the Obama team simply regarded the Supreme Court majority as another group of Republicans, deserving no greater deference than GOP senators or congressmen."

In the media this week were several pairs of breasts belonging to the famous and the now infamous-- Adrienne, Kate, Rihanna, Kris-- as if each set was as important as all other critical breaking news on the globe. Apparently in the triage deadline discussions of newsworthiness, these functional, admirable assets of the female physiology trumped all and became suddenly noteworthy when bared, utilized, tattooed or discussed.

It seems the editors across the globe proclaimed, "Go with the boobs!"

In many cases editors decided these women's breasts deserved more coverage -- OK, pun intended -- than the fallout from an irresponsible video leading to widespread violence in Libya and beyond, the upcoming election fight or the Federal Reserve's new economic stimulus plans.

Get a grip. Or, more importantly, let's loosen the grip on our cultural breast obsession. Enough with the boobs.

Adrienne Pine of American University, stirred controversy by soothing a sick toddler during an anthropology lecture by breastfeeding in class. I reserve judgment since I believe mother on mother conflict is a reprehensible habit and one that creates a war on mothers, between mothers and about mothers.

But to the point, I am a university assistant professor and single mother as well. And though I began teaching at Northwestern University when my sons were seven, five, and two (past my personal breastfeeding limits of six to nine months of age per child), I understand completely the panic of a sick child, a canceled babysitter and a classroom of eager students expecting you to teach.

You do the best you can in the circumstances. You make snap decisions in emergencies. And you can't please all parties. I am more modest than Ms. Pine and when circumstance forced me to breastfeed in inconvenient situations -- on an airplane, in a restaurant or a bathroom stall - -I took the blanket approach and completely shrouded half my body and most all of my child's no matter what. But that was also more than 20 years ago and none of us were so liberated.

So if I was in her position, I would have offered my child a bottle or a pacifier. If that didn't work, I likely would have handed out the syllabus, lectured on key points and apologized for having to take a 10-minute break. During that break I would have offered a brief assignment -- write down your key questions or goals for the course in my absence -- and returned to a discussion.

Certainly, I applaud her transparency, candor and humanity. And in her defense, her audience is not small children; they are college students who are most likely all 18 and older, who can vote, smoke cigarettes and go to war. They also have likely watched more bare breasts in television, movies, Girls Gone Wild videos, or real-life spring breaks than could ever be offered from a harried single mother professor at the podium. And I get it that Professor Pine recoiled at the notion of the campus newspaper trying to make her predicament salacious news. On that point, I emailed her my support.

I understand her dilemma -- because as a working mother you are constantly weighing the need to be a good mother and a good professional -- juggling not just plates in the air, but butcher knives in flames.

Her breasts do not need to make news.

In a new book reviewed this week, Breasts: A Natural and Unnatural History, author and historian Florence Williams takes an environmental, scientific, historic and cultural view of breasts. Her book is a decidedly more intelligent, insightful and meaningful look at the female body than Naomi Wolf dares in her tell-all orgasm tome, Vagina: A New Biography. Williams writes, "Perhaps not surprisingly, breasts have often eluded clearheaded thinking."

Jeffrey MacDonald, a clean-cut Green Beret and doctor convicted of killing of his pregnant wife and their two daughters, is getting another chance to try proving his innocence -- more than four decades after the nation was gripped by his tales of Charles Manson-like hippies doped up on acid slaughtering his family.

The case now hinges on something that wasn't available when he was first put on trial: DNA evidence. A federal judge planned to hold a hearing Monday to consider new DNA evidence and witness testimony that MacDonald and his supporters say will finally clear him of a crime that became the basis of Joe McGinniss' best-selling book "Fatal Vision" and a made-for-TV drama.

It's the latest twist in a case that has been the subject of military and civilian courts, intense legal wrangling and shifting alliances.

"This is Jeff's opportunity to be back in court almost 33 years to the day of his conviction," said Kathryn MacDonald, who married him a decade ago while he has been in prison.

MacDonald, now 68 and not eligible for parole until 2020, has never wavered from his claim that he didn't kill his pregnant wife, Colette, and their two daughters, 5-year-old Kimberley and 2-year-old Kristen. He has maintained that he awoke on their sofa in their home at Fort Bragg in the early morning hours of Feb. 17, 1970, as they were being attacked by three men and a woman.

In an October 2000 letter MacDonald wrote to Kathryn MacDonald, provided by her to The Associated Press, he wrote: "It would be a dishonor to their memory to compromise the truth and `admit' to something I didn't do -- no matter how long it takes."

The gruesome stabbing and beating deaths came just three months after the Manson Family slayings in California were revealed. The pregnant wife and MacDonald's description of the woman attacker chanting "acid is groovy, kill the pigs" all fed into fears that Manson-type killers were on the loose in North Carolina. The word "pig" was written in blood on a headboard -- the same word that was written on the door of pregnant Manson victim Sharon Tate's house in Los Angeles.

The Army charged the Ivy League-educated MacDonald with murder, then dropped the charges months later after an Article 32 hearing. By December 1970, MacDonald was not just a free man but also had received an honorable discharge.

But his father-in-law, Alfred Kassab, who initially believed in his innocence, changed his mind and eventually persuaded prosecutors to pursue the case in civilian court. In 1979, MacDonald was charged, convicted and sentenced to life in prison, a sentence he now serves at the federal prison in Cumberland, Md.

MacDonald has stood by his innocence claim so strongly that he refused to apply for parole for years, and when he did, he refused to acknowledge any guilt and was rejected. MacDonald and his supporters have continued to pursue legal avenues over the years to try to clear his name.

U.S. District Court Judge James Fox will consider two types of evidence: three hairs that don't match the family's DNA and a statement from Jimmy Britt, a deputy U.S. marshal when the case was tried. Britt, who has since died, gave a statement to defense attorneys in 2005 that he heard prosecutor Jim Blackburn threaten Helena Stoeckley, a troubled local woman whom MacDonald had identified as one of the attackers.

A previous MacDonald attorney has said Stoeckley was prepared to testify she was in the MacDonald home the night of the murders until Blackburn threatened to charge her with the slayings. She later testified she couldn't remember where she was that night.

A real-life exorcist in Colombia has boasted that demand is so high for his services that he performs ten services a week.

 It could be the melodramatic staging offered by Hermes Cifuentes, a Catholic priest, that is creating such demand.

Those claiming to be possessed by the Devil are smeared in dirt and surrounded by fire, limes and eggs. Dressed in white, they lie on the ground blindfolded surrounded by crucifixes and a ring of fire. For good measure their skin is smeared with mud.

They lie between strips of green and white ribbon as Father Hermes chases the spirits away.

The white-robed Father Hemes, 51, said he now performs ten a week in La Cumbre and has carried out a total of 35,000 over the past two decades.

Jennifer Lopez stopped by "Katie" on Friday to chat about her recent divorce and 25-year-old boyfriend, Casper Smart.

Lopez, 43, dished on her and Smart's 18-year age difference with host Katie Couric, who also famously dated a much younger man -- Brooks Perlin, who is 17 years Couric's junior.

"It’s hard for me to think of my age," Lopez said. "I feel very youthful. And I feel very comfortable in my own skin. And it’s funny, until somebody brings it up, I don’t think we really think about it."

The former "American Idol" judge revealed that she feels "lucky" that Smart -- who is also her backup dancer and choreographer -- came into her life.

"We’re enjoying each other’s company and he’s a great support system and he’s great at what he does," she said.

Rumors of their relationship surfaced in November 2011 when Smart was spotted leaving Lopez's New York City hotel. The pair broke their silence about the relationship in a July 2012 interview on "Good Morning America."

Lopez also opened up to Couric about her divorce from estranged husband Marc Anthony, whom she split from in July 2011.

"It was really tough decision to make, and one that in your heart, is always just going to affect you," she said. "You never want to break up a family. That wasn’t my dream. My dream was for us to always be together. But things don’t work out and you feel like it’s the better choice. If I didn’t feel it was the better choice then I wouldn’t have done it. But we’re doing good with it."

Despite Lopez's three failed attempts at marriage, the songstress has said that she would walk down the aisle again. She's not the only celeb to still believe in love, having experienced divorce. Click through the slideshow below for six others: