FL FL - Sabrina Aisenberg, 5 months, Valrico, 24 Nov 1997

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

peggy said:
Besides the dog not barking, what about the tapes? Guess they weren't allowed for some reason. Saw story again last night on 48 hr Mystery or something like that, and the tapes were a confession of their involvement and how to get on the same page with their recollections of that night. I don't think there was an intruder.
Click to expand...

The tapes were played during a trial and on the program and nothing could be understood. The judge through them out. The CBS audio expert couldn't even understand the content of the tapes.
 
Call me cynical. However, I say the odds are the parents were involved in the baby's disappearance. I have always wondered how the child sustained the injury to her head. (It looks like her head is shaved in a spot with stitches?)
 
nanandjim said:
Call me cynical. However, I say the odds are the parents were involved in the baby's disappearance. I have always wondered how the child sustained the injury to her head. (It looks like her head is shaved in a spot with stitches?)
Click to expand...

See, I lean towards their involvement too and the head injury always bothered me too. The thing that really raises my red flag though is that the father didn't bother to click on his call waiting when information on Sabrina could have come in. I just don't know what to think.
Karen
 
Most of the people that live in the area feel the parents were involved. They were strange and did not seem to care about looking for her until they were advised to do so by their attorney. They left the area shortly after she disappeared.
The tapes were of poor quality, however I put no stock in anything done by See BS.
 
SoloFlyer said:
Most of the people that live in the area feel the parents were involved. They were strange and did not seem to care about looking for her until they were advised to do so by their attorney. They left the area shortly after she disappeared.
The tapes were of poor quality, however I put no stock in anything done by See BS.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but what is "See BS?"
Karen
 
nanandjim said:
Call me cynical. However, I say the odds are the parents were involved in the baby's disappearance. I have always wondered how the child sustained the injury to her head. (It looks like her head is shaved in a spot with stitches?)
Click to expand...

I thought that theory was debunked. There was no shaved spot with stitches. The police had come up with the idea that Serena had a head wound because her baby hair was thinned out in one spot, which the parents contended was because that's where her little head touched the bed when she was sleeping. (I totally understood the parents explanation, because my own babies had thinned out hair where their heads touched the bed, and if I were an abusive parent no way would I take a picture that highlighted the damage! That's insane!) Anyway, I thought I remembered reading that the photo had been analyzed and there was no shaved spot, no stitches. This would have been about the same time that the tapes were thrown out.

I don't know if the parents had a thing to do with her disappearance or not, never have read enough facts to make a decision. I know the grand jury thought there was NO evidence to indict them.
 
kgeaux said:
I thought that theory was debunked. There was no shaved spot with stitches. The police had come up with the idea that Serena had a head wound because...
Click to expand...

Her name is Sabrina. Thanks for that explanation, it does make some sense. Still, I'm not sure...
Karen
 
kgeaux said:
I thought that theory was debunked. There was no shaved spot with stitches. ....
Click to expand...
I saw it with my own two eyes on a home video. That's what it looked like to me.
 
Any physical injuries on Sabrina would have been disclosed by LE and the media I would think. If there were stitchs there would have been medical records. To my knowledge has never been any pattern of abuse or medical verification of any injuries presented by LE on Sabrina. NO neighbors , parents etc saying they saw any injuries on little Sabrina.
 
AuntieKaren said:
Her name is Sabrina. Thanks for that explanation, it does make some sense. Still, I'm not sure...
Karen
Click to expand...

OOPS. My fingers sometimes are not communicating with my brain when I type. I don't even know anyone named Serena, don't know WHERE that came from.
 
Just had to comment - very clever name - everytime I see it I chuckle - very innovative - and appropriate considering the theme of this board.

But in all seriousness - if only 1/2 the people on this board were real detectives, the rate of unsolved crimes would drop like a rock. Charlie Chan, Nick Charles, Sam Spade couldn't hold a candle to most of you guys!
 
jokar said:
Just had to comment - very clever name - everytime I see it I chuckle - very innovative - and appropriate considering the theme of this board.

But in all seriousness - if only 1/2 the people on this board were real detectives, the rate of unsolved crimes would drop like a rock. Charlie Chan, Nick Charles, Sam Spade couldn't hold a candle to most of you guys!
Click to expand...
Thanks.!!..now if you could just get the folks to stop calling me "smelly" things would be fine!!!!
Frankly I think crimes are easily "solved"..it's just proving the obvious in a court of law with all the roadblocks we've put up to reach justice!!!:crazy:

Casshew did the siggie.!!! She's really good at that!!!
..which I am holding onto for now even though the trial is over....just too, too apt for the creep!!!
 
Tristan said:
This case has always baffled me, but I definitely lean more towards the parents being guilty. It's just my gut feeling, based primarily on the following facts:

The door being unlocked
The dog not barking (seldom would a dog not bark at a stranger.)
The fact that the "alleged" kidnapper knew the layout of the house
and did not leave any real physical DNA evidence,
.
Click to expand...
Based on those facts it would seem that Jessica Lunsford was taken by a family member...but the cold hard truth is that a stranger DID enter her home through an unlocked door, the dog DID NOT bark and as far as we know her abductor left no real physical DNA evidence....


I'm a fence sitter on the Aisenberg case...I watched it played in daily in the news and papers here in Tampa. I find it interesting comparing this case with the Lunsford case...how they hired a lawyer so quickly, refused to take polygraphs (that I am aware of) etc...while Mark Lunsford and his parents completely cooperated with LE. However, have had some dealings with the HSCO I can honestly tell you that they are not always on top of it when it comes to investigating crimes...they DID screw up in this one.
 
Steven and Marlene Aisenberg cannot review a file that details the Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office investigation into the disappearance of their infant daughter, a judge ruled Tuesday.
The couple had asked for the file as part of their lawsuit against the sheriff's office and several deputies.

After the 1997 disappearance of their 5-month-old, the Aisenbergs were prosecuted on charges that they lied to investigators. The charges were dropped, and federal prosecutors conceded they wrongfully prosecuted the couple.

The Aisenbergs sued, saying investigators zeroed in on them, then lied and fabricated evidence while failing to properly investigate the disappearance.

http://tampatrib.com/FloridaMetro/MGBOBNKZ8AE.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 141 more.
Total: 3,428 (members: 142, guests: 3,286)

Online statistics

Members online
142
Guests online
3,286
Total visitors
3,428
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
604,405
Messages
18,171,647
Members
232,544
Latest member
K.Kosky
Back
Top