One morning in 1997, a five-month-old baby vanished from her crib in Valrico, Florida. No forced entry. No ransom note. Just an empty room — and a mystery that has haunted investigators for over 25 years.
Sabrina Paige Aisenberg was five months old when she was abducted from her crib on November 24, 1997.
Sabrina was born on June 6, 1997 to Marlene and Steve Aisenberg. Sabrina had two older siblings – William who was 8 in 1997 and Monica who was 5.
Sabrina was said to be an easy baby who would generally sleep through the night.
Marlene has said that during the night of November 23-24, she checked on Sabrina in her crib and she was fine. This check occurred at around 12am.
Marlene woke up on Monday November 24, 1997 at around 6.25am. Some news reports that Marlene was awoken by either a noisy fish tank in the home or an alarm that she had set up on the television.
Marlene said she started to walk to the kitchen.
“I noticed the laundry room door to the garage is opened and I’m like, ‘Whoa, what’s that doing open?’ And I just ran to the first bedroom and I look in Sabrina’s crib and she was gone. And I was just, like, you know, I was hysterical. ‘Steve, Sabrina’s missing! Sabrina’s gone!’”
William and Monica were still asleep, safely tucked into their beds.
Sabrina’s baby blanket had disappeared along with her.
The couple called police at 6.45am.
According to the Charley Project, investigators found an unidentified blonde hair and a shoe print near the baby’s crib, as well as seven unidentified fingerprints inside the house. Authorities took several items from the home for analysis, including Sabrina’s crib and bedding.
The area was said to be generally safe but there had been several reported break-ins or attempted break ins in the area in recent times.
Authorities interviewed neighbors of the Aisenberg family. One neighbor reported that his dog barked at around 1am on the morning that Sabrina disappeared. The man got up to let the dog out and he said he heard a baby crying in the distance. The man said that none of his close neighbours had small children at that time. It was also discovered that the Aisenberg’s had left their garage door open overnight and that was discussed as a possible entry point for an abductor.
Marty Rosen, a local journalist, spoke about the shockwave that went through the community after Sabrina disappeared.
“This frightened a lot of people, terrified a lot of young parents. It was chilling for people who lived in that community. It was a quiet, safe, out-of-the-way place. And then a baby disappears.”
Marlene and Steve were seen leaving their home on the day after Sabrina vanished and they were captured on camera smiling.
Marty Rosen said “A lot of people in the community saw that clip and saw Steve smile, and they saw Marlene with a quick flash of a smile, and they jumped to conclusions. They said, ‘Why would these people be smiling? There must be something wrong here.’ Some people felt they were guilty of something. Some people felt that they were involved in some way in Sabrina’s disappearance.”
Marlene and Steve became prime suspects in the case. Marlene said “‘To me, it was the most unbelievable thing I could have ever heard. And, I was like, ‘I have no idea where Sabrina is, I have no idea who took her. That’s why you’re here. Help.’ You know, ‘Find her.’”
Marlene and Steve book voluntarily took polygraph tests.
Marlene spoke about her results. “They told me it was inconclusive. And they told me that they expected it to be that because I was hysterical and, you know, everything. And my baby’s gone, and you know, they would expect that.”
The sheriff’s office would not confirm publicly if she had passed or failed.
Shortly after this, the Aisenberg’s hired an attorney. They said that their treatment by the police gave them no choice in the matter.
“When the police sit across from you and say, ‘We believe you know where your daughter is and we believe you know who has her,’ there’s a good reason to get an attorney.”
Authorities questioned why nobody in the house woke up if an intruder had entered (especially as a neighbor’s dog had possibly barked when the incident was occuring). The Aisenberg’s also owned a dog and they said their pet never barked that night.
Authorities got permission to place listening devices inside the home a few weeks after Sabrina vanished. According to an article from CBS:
Steve allegedly said to Marlene “I wish I hadn’t harmed her. It was the cocaine.”
According to the indictment, a month after reporting Sabrina missing, Marlene said to Steven “the baby is dead and buried. It was found dead because you did it.” Steven answered. “Honey, there was nothing I could do about it. We need to discuss the way that we can beat the charge.”
Lt. Greg Brown of the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s office said at one point:
“Unfortunately, most of the leads bring us back to a dead end, and that brings us back to this community. And we feel that the answers to this crime are within this community. Our policy has always been that we don’t list people as a suspect unless we have enough to charge them. We have not ruled the Aisenbergs out. They have failed to assist us in some ways, and it makes it more difficult to rule them out as having some involvement in the case.”
This is what Marlene and Steve said about their theories in the case.
Marlene Aisenberg:
“I believe that somebody came into our home and just took her. It had to be someone who wanted a baby so bad and they couldn’t have one themselves or they needed money so bad that they would want to sell her.”
Steve Aisenberg:
“It could be that somebody just watched Marlene and I, and saw our habits of occasionally leaving the garage open and knew we had a baby. Or, it could have been somebody that knew us casually and then through others knew our habits. So it, you know, anything is just pure speculation.”
In September 1999, almost two years after Sabrina disappeared, her parents were indicted on conspiracy and other charges.
In February 2001, a judge found that authorities had lied when they got permission to place the listening devices in the Aisenberg home.
According to the Charley Project, Steve and Marlene were cleared of all charges against them. The judge also stated that there was nothing on the tapes which contained the evidence mentioned in the transcripts of the Aisenbergs’ conversations. The lead prosecutor in the Aisenbergs’ case was demoted in July 2001.
Steve and Marlene tried to fill motions to get the government to repay their legal fees. They initially asked for $2.7-2.9m in damages, and then dropped the amount to $1.3-1.5m. They also sued for more damages and accused prosecutors of conspiring to deprive them of their civil rights as well as of fabricating evidence.
The suit was dismissed by a judge in 2004, stating the law gives prosecutors an immunity from such lawsuits about their official actions. The Aisenberg’s ended up dropping a similar suit against the sheriff’s office in 2006 as they were worried about it impeding Sabrina’s case.
In 2003, the possibility that Sabrina was ‘Paloma Unknown’ began to be looked into. Paloma Unknown is an infant who was abandoned in May 1998.
This child was taken over the Mexican border into Texas by a teenage female claiming to be her mother.
The teen gave the child to Molly Garza, a Spanish woman. Molly ended up being deported to Spain and was unable to care for the child, so she gave Paloma to a friend who was a nurse at a migrant clinic. Molly gave permission for the nurse to put the child up for adoption. This type of adoption was apparently common practice at the time, around the Mexican border. The nurse gave Paloma to her sister and husband. The child was raised in Illinois. When the couple tried to legally adopt the child, they were unable to as they did not have a birth certificate or any legal documents. They were appointed as her guardians.
A woman saw Sabrina’s missing child poster and noticed that she resembled Paloma, so she called authorities. Marlene and Steve were notified and they agreed that Paloma did look similar to their daughter. DNA was collected from Paloma and was tested against Sabrina’s – there was no match. Paloma has never been identified.
In 2005, Sabrina’s parents were questioned again by the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office. They took polygraph tests at this time and both claimed they passed.
Steve and Marlene moved with William and Monica to Maryland. According to the Charley Project, they continue to maintain their innocence in Sabrina’s disappearance and stated they believe that their daughter is alive and living with another family somewhere in the United States. Many investigators still think Sabrina was the victim of foul play.
Marlene said, “It’s a process, it’s something we live through every day still, and we will continue to live through it until she’s home with us.”
The Aisenberg’s have said they have their DNA on several familiar genetic websites in the hope of one day matching with Sabrina.
SOURCE LIST
https://www.missingkids.org/poster/ncmc/840605/1
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/parents-accused-of-kidnapping