Saw this discussed on the Casey Anthony thread. Baby Sabrina Aisenberg was kidnapped in a middle-class Florida neighborhood. The parents were professionals, Jewish, had 2 other children. %0D %0D It's never been solved. What happened to the Aisenberg family and what happened to that ugly baby?
The Aisenberg baby abduction case in Florida
|by Anonymous||reply 27||08/17/2013|
Don't think they're guilty simply for the reason that their phones were tapped and revealed nothing, according to a judge who threw the tapes out. They would have slipped up. %0D %0D Also, they were so willing to talk, on any show that would have them. Compare that to, say, the Ramseys. %0D %0D But a few days after the child went missing, Mr. Aisenberg was shown on TV laughing at something a policeman said, and for most people that sealed it. I guess they think you must be guilty if you can even crack a smile while your daughter is missing.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||05/13/2011|
Is this the case where the daughter was taken from the house
|by Anonymous||reply 2||05/13/2011|
That baby was too ugly ugly babies don't get snatched sorry but that is true.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||05/13/2011|
Marlene Aisenberg checked on her kid at midnight, baby fine. Went in again after 6:00 am, baby gone. Never found.
Police found one unidentified blond hair and seven unidentified finger prints in the Aisenbergs' house, plus a shoe print by the child's crib. Neighbors reported several attempted break-ins, all at houses with small children. Another neighbor reported that his dog barked at 1:00 a.m., and as he let his dog out, he heard a baby crying.
The Aisenbergs also had a dog, which didn't bark at all that night, but you know, some dogs are stupid.
The police illegally wiretapped the Aisenbergs' house. Their transcripts of the tapes had the parents saying that the kid was dead and bickering at each other, each blaming the other. Also, cocaine. A judge who listened to the tapes said that the Aisenbergs said nothing of the sort--the tapes were almost completely inaudible, indecipherable.
I'm inclined to believe it was a stranger abduction.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||05/13/2011|
Stranger abductions of infants from their homes not for ransom are almost unheard of.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||05/13/2011|
That "tape" of the Aisenbergs that the prosecution tried to use was ridiculous. I saw a show on one of those crime channels with an interview with the Aisenbergs' lawyer. He played the tape and then showed the transcription of them supposedly saying, "You know you killed her" or something.
It was totally made up! Nothing remotely sounded like the transcription claimed it did. I feel sorry for those people.
I can't see how they could've killed their own baby, planted a fake footprint, cleaned up, and transported it somewhere it was never found despite all that searching before calling the police in the morning.
I feel sorry for them, and I always thought they got bad treatment because the wife comes off as a little disheveled and flighty and because the husband smiled at the joke the cop told him, not because there was any evidence for their guilt.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||05/13/2011|
Yes, r5, they are-- but there is simply no evidence against the parents. What was the motive? To be free of responsibility? No, because they still had two other kids to take care of anyway. A covered-up accidental death? Then where is the body? They didn't have enough time to dump it far from home, yet the cops searched the whole area and found nothing. %0D %0D So, while you make a good point, crazy people sometimes do crazy things to get white infants. Hell, sometimes they kill pregnant mothers and cut them right out of their bodies.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||05/13/2011|
I still don't understand how the fact the "tape" of the Aisenbergs was indecipherable means by definition that they are innocent. White people can get away with anything.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||05/13/2011|
By itself, it doesn't. But there's no evidence that they did anything, and there's evidence that someone else was involved (the hair, fingerprints, and footprints, the neighbors statements).
Ugh. I was just Googling stuff to read about this case, and I found this Larry King show transcript, and ugh: Nancy Grace. Dumb bitch.
"And the police are expected to believe between midnight and 6:30 some unknown stranger sneaks into their house, that knows the layout of their home, and takes their baby. It is just too much to believe."
What, is the layout of the house supposed to be this big fucking mystery that can't be solved without a map, a GPS device, and a team of Sherpas? Do your average four-bedroom Florida McMansions come in such a bewildering array of configurations that one is doomed to wander around fruitlessly searching without a prior knowledge of the floor plan? Hell, if I wanted to find a baby's room, I could probably figure out it just by walking around the house once. You know the room with the teddy bear print on the curtains? Yeah, that's the baby's room.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||05/13/2011|
Exactly. I also think the parents had nothing to do with it. And how horrible for the mother; you would never get over it.%0D %0D Someone wanting a baby could have easily parked in the neighborhood for a few days to get an idea of the Aisenberg's comings and goings. On a trip out, they could easily walk around the house and locate the baby's room. As somene else said, this was your typical FL tract home (ugh).%0D %0D Go back at night, find a way to jimmy the window or door (has it ever been mentioned if they had an active alarm system? I guess not) at night and do what you are, apparently, psycho enough to do and actually even get away with. It's not that uncommon. It's sick.%0D %0D I hate that fucking state. %0D %0D
|by Anonymous||reply 10||05/13/2011|
The Aisenbergs' said that their garage door was open that night, and that their alarm system was off because they very rarely activated it. Not smart, but common for people who live in the country or the suburbs.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||05/13/2011|
I believe the baby was taken and raped in the woods in back of the property. A neighbor heard a baby crying when he let his dog out late that night. Then the baby was murdered and disposed of.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||01/02/2013|
I can't believe someone out there has the nerve to call that baby UGLY especially when she might not be alive anymore.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||08/17/2013|
"What was the motive? To be free of responsibility?"
Apparently, you have never spent time with a one year old.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||08/17/2013|
She was dumped in the bay.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||08/17/2013|
Let it go, Jake. It's Florida.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||08/17/2013|
Could the baby have been taken by a workman or guest in the home, who could have scoped out the layout? Someone who knew to give the dog a treat to not bark? Perhaps an individual who had a grudge against the family?
|by Anonymous||reply 17||08/17/2013|
Sometimes ugly babies grow into beautiful adults. Sometimes beautiful babies grow into ugly adults.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||08/17/2013|
R15, Can you summarize the article? It's very confusing. Does the author believe the Aisenberg's are guilty, and if so, why?
|by Anonymous||reply 19||08/17/2013|
R19 read it yourself.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||08/17/2013|
R19, I've already read it. Like most of those who've made comments on the article, it doesn't make sense, and is the worst piece of published writing I've ever seen.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||08/17/2013|
Ugh. Yes. The article makes the parents seem guilty. The baby died and they stashed the body in the boat in their garage. They hired the attorney, who may or may not have been sleeping with the wife / the baby daddy. Attorney gets his low life 'investigator' to chop up the baby body and bait crab traps with it. The low life is an idiot, brags to his friends about the whole thing, almost getting everyone caught. But the D.A. doesn't have enough evidence, comes up with some bullshit illegal wiretap that doesn't even implicate the couple, gets caught doing said illegal wiretap, and gets in trouble himself instead.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||08/17/2013|
Sounds like horse shit to me. Why would anyone risk hiring some low life just to get rid of a body? How hard can it be to get rid of the remains of a tiny baby? They had a boat, they could have just dumped it out at sea themselves.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||08/17/2013|
Yeah, but the chopping up the baby to bait crab traps... Lordy...
|by Anonymous||reply 24||08/17/2013|
Not necessary, R24. You could just weight the body and throw it in. It would never be found. The bait thing just sounds like melodrama the lowlife dreamed up.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||08/17/2013|
R22, Thanks for clarifying. What would be the couples' motive for killing their baby, or was it just an accident, and then they panicked? Wouldn't someone know that they had a boat, or check back records? Was it someone else's boat?
They keep mentioning that Steve used cocaine. Warning to casual drug takers, be careful if you're ever tied to any crime.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||08/17/2013|
Did the baby have issues? Like maybe it was retarded or something? Or had a disease?
|by Anonymous||reply 27||08/17/2013|