How does a family become entangled in a web of conspiracy and murder, driven by motives that defy understanding? This question lies at the heart of the shocking case surrounding Charles Adelson and Donna Adelson, recently discussed on the "Hidden Killers" podcast with Tony Brueski and trial consultant and body language expert Susan Constantine.

Charles Adelson, recently convicted of murder, faces a life sentence. But the story doesn't end there. The focus has shifted to his mother, Donna Adelson, apprehended while trying to flee the country. She's now charged with murder, unraveling further layers of this complex family drama. Constantine, renowned for her expertise in decoding non-verbal cues, weighed in on this evolving narrative with Brueski, sharing her insights into the Adelson family dynamics.

The case, riddled with intricacies, left even seasoned experts like Brueski and Constantine reaching for crime scene boards to make sense of the convoluted relationships and events. "I was getting a string out because it was like, who did what, did who, did he, what?" Brueski remarked, echoing the sentiments of many following the case.

The motive behind the murder of Dan Markle, Charles Adelson’s brother-in-law, remains baffling. “There was really no abuse, no physical abuse, no sexual abuse. There’s nothing that would have warranted to have this guy dead,” Constantine noted, highlighting the seemingly baseless hatred driving the plot. The trial revealed incriminating phone calls and emails, suggesting a deep-seated animosity and a desire for control.

Donna Adelson's role, particularly her attempt to flee to a non-extradition country, raised red flags for Constantine. “She escapes and goes to another country, tries to get out of the country because why wouldn’t she, if you’re guilty, you would run. If you’re innocent, you would stay and fight it out,” she observed, implying guilt through actions.

A pivotal piece of evidence was an email from Donna to her daughter, the ex-wife of the victim. Constantine’s analysis of this communication is telling: “It’s like, I’m putting you, you know, right now you’ve got five weeks to figure it out.” This email, Constantine argues, suggests Donna's influential role in orchestrating the murder.

The Adelson family dynamics, particularly the mother-son relationship between Donna and Charles, drew Constantine’s attention. “He’s obviously a very smart guy. What is going on with that mother-son dynamic?” she questioned. This dynamic, along with the strength in numbers theory, paints a picture of a family driven by collective disgruntlement, ultimately culminating in a tragic outcome.

Constantine sees Donna Adelson as the ringleader, a figure exerting power and control over her family. “Mom or your dad are big influencers,” she said, highlighting the potential for a parent's influence to lead children down dark paths. The level of narcissism and vindictiveness displayed, according to Constantine, is not something that evolves overnight but is a trait developed over a lifetime.

The Adelson case, with its layers of family intrigue, deceit, and now murder, poses a fundamental question about the nature of familial bonds and their potential to drive individuals to extreme actions. As Constantine pointedly notes, “No one wakes up being a narcissist.” This case, then, is not just about the murder of Dan Markle; it’s a deep dive into the psychology of a family capable of conspiring to such chilling ends.

As the legal saga continues to unfold, the question remains: How far can the roots of familial influence extend in shaping decisions, and in this instance, could they have been the driving force behind a plot as heinous as murder? The answers, as the trial progresses, may offer a rare glimpse into the depths of human psychology and the dark corners of familial manipulation.
Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.co