Skip to content
Dan Markel— Case Archive
personpersonJames Keith McElveenJames Keith McElveenForensic audio engineer who authenticated enhanced restaurant recordings, including the Dolce Vita and Matsuri recordings, as a prosecution witness in the Magbanua retrial, Charlie Adelson trial, and Donna Adelson trial.← All People
Expert witnessFlorida State University

James Keith McElveen

Courtroom still of James Keith McElveen.

Forensic audio engineer who authenticated enhanced restaurant recordings, including the Dolce Vita and Matsuri recordings, as a prosecution witness in the Magbanua retrial, Charlie Adelson trial, and Donna Adelson trial.

AppearedMagbanua RetrialCharlie AdelsonDonna Adelson
166 lines·12 proceedings·3 mentions·3 trials

About

James Keith McElveen testified as a forensic engineer and audio-forensics expert about processing noisy restaurant recordings used in the case. He explained that he worked in segments where necessary, suppressed background sound, and emphasized selected voices while leaving the recorded content unchanged. His testimony supported the admission and identification of enhanced-audio and synchronized-video exhibits. Under cross-examination, he acknowledged that distance, acoustics, low volume, one-sided capture, and whispering left some speech unclear or unrecoverable, while maintaining that processing made additional words intelligible. He also confined his opinion to the audio rather than transcript accuracy, clarified when video had simply been paired with previously processed sound, and identified audio he had not reviewed. In the 2025 proceeding, a disclosure inquiry concerning an enhanced version ended with a finding that the late disclosure was inadvertent and caused no prejudice.

Trial Record (12)

KMMagbanua RetrialMay 18, 2022 – May 27, 2022Called by prosecution

Testifying as a forensic engineer, James Keith McElveen explained the limitations and processing of an enhanced restaurant recording and authenticated the related audio and synchronized-video exhibits.

Day 4

Day 5

DirectJames Keith McElveen - DirectJames Keith McElveenGeorgia Cappleman2highlights32lines spoken

Summary

Forensic engineer James Keith McElveen described enhancing a noisy restaurant recording and testified that the process could not alter its content; the court admitted State's Exhibit 115.

Highlights (2)

Quote“Absolutely not. The way that our tool works is you configure it. You input the audio. You hit process, and then you go away. There's no ability for it to add, to delete, or to otherwise edit any of the content.”— James Keith McElveenMcElveen described the limits of the audio-enhancement process and said it could not alter the recording's content.Open in transcript →Watch this moment ▶
CrossJames Keith McElveen - CrossJames Keith McElveenChristopher DeCoste2highlights32lines spoken

Summary

McElveen said the later audio work was not rushed and qualified the precision of his recording-setup assessments.

Highlights (2)

testimony highlightMcElveen distinguished the rushed first delivery from the later refocused-audio work, saying he had sufficient time for the latter and did not feel pressure to meet a specific date.Open in transcript →Watch this moment ▶
Quote“we had plenty of time to do this second one where we refocused the audio.”— James Keith McElveenThe witness rejected the premise that the later enhancement was produced under a rushed deadline.Open in transcript →Watch this moment ▶
RedirectJames Keith McElveen - RedirectJames Keith McElveenGeorgia Cappleman2highlights8lines spoken

Summary

McElveen verified that the combined restaurant-video exhibit used his final enhanced audio and was synchronized with the video.

Highlights (2)

Quote“I reviewed the video with the -- with our audio put in it, and I checked two things: One, that the audio seemed to be the same audio, and it was; and, two, that the timing of where the audio was inserted relative to the movements in the video were synchronous.”— James Keith McElveenMcElveen described his verification that the combined exhibit used the same audio and was synchronized with the video.Open in transcript →Watch this moment ▶
ProceduralExhibit Mix-Up Corrected: Dolce Vita Recordings 114 and 116 Clarified Out of Jury1highlight3lines spoken

Summary

The court corrected a swap between Dolce Vita Exhibits 114 and 116, obtained a proffer identifying Exhibit 116, and directed the State to recall Bronstein to establish Exhibit 114.

Highlights (1)

Quote“To the best of my ability in the current situation, it contains the original video that I was sent by your office coupled with the audio that we returned for Device 2.”— James Keith McElveenMcElveen identified the contents of Exhibit 116 during the proffer.Open in transcript →Watch this moment ▶
CACharlie AdelsonOct 26, 2023 – Nov 6, 2023Called by prosecution

Testifying on Day 4, James Keith McElveen explained his forensic processing of the Dolce Vita and Matsuri recordings and addressed the limits of what enhancement could recover.

Day 4

DirectJames Keith McElveen - DirectJames Keith McElveenGeorgia Cappleman3highlights27lines spoken

Summary

Forensic engineer James Keith McElveen explained audio processing of two restaurant recordings; the court admitted State's Exhibits 110 and 113.

Highlights (3)

Quote“No, when we begin our processing, we set up the controls, and the tool does not allow you to actually make any changes. You hit process, and it starts at the beginning and works all the way to the end. And you can't change anything as you go along and decide to leave the word "no" or “yes” out. You get the entire thing, and the same length of the recording in is the same that comes out down to microseconds.”— James Keith McElveenMcElveen testified that the processing tool could not be adjusted to add, remove, or selectively alter words.Open in transcript →Watch this moment ▶
CrossJames Keith McElveen - CrossJames Keith McElveenDan Rashbaum2highlights22lines spoken

Summary

McElveen acknowledged limits in the enhanced restaurant recordings, including inaudible speech, unknown pre-recording conversation, and unrecoverable whispers.

Highlights (2)

testimony highlightMcElveen testified that the enhancement made more words intelligible than the original transcriptions, but that whispers in the Matsuri recording were unrecoverable because of low sound and head obstruction.Open in transcript →Watch this moment ▶
DADonna AdelsonAug 22, 2025 – Sep 4, 2025Called by prosecution

Testifying as an audio-forensics expert, James Keith McElveen explained his noise-suppression work on restaurant recordings and the limits of his opinion. Cross-examination examined the scope of that work and audio he had not reviewed.

Day 4

DirectJames Keith McElveen - DirectJames Keith McElveenGeorgia Cappleman4highlights29lines spoken

Summary

Audio-forensics expert James Keith McElveen explained his enhancement method, and the court admitted enhanced recording exhibits from the Dolce vita and Matsuri restaurants.

Highlights (4)

Quote“Only -- how do I put this? we don't alter the subject's voice. we leave it natural and as untouched as possible. what we do is suppress everything else that's not in that place we are trying to focus on.”— James Keith McElveenMcElveen described the stated limits of his audio-enhancement method.Open in transcript →Watch this moment ▶
Quote“Yes. I just don't want to step outside of my role in audio forensics and speak to a transcript.”— James Keith McElveenMcElveen distinguished his audio-forensics opinion from an opinion on transcript accuracy.Open in transcript →Watch this moment ▶
evidence eventAfter a question about whether McElveen could attest to the transcript, the court admitted State's Exhibits 115 and 116; the court noted Magbanua had already authenticated the transcript as part of her testimony.Open in transcript →Watch this moment ▶
CrossJames Keith McElveen - CrossJames Keith McElveenJoshua D. Zelman3highlights6lines spoken

Summary

McElveen said recent restaurant-footage work did not add an enhancement and that he had not reviewed audio from Wendi Adelson's July 18, 2014 interview.

Highlights (3)

testimony highlightMcElveen testified that the recent work combined the original video with previously processed audio in a different format and did not further enhance the material.Open in transcript →Watch this moment ▶
Quote“what we did was not enhancement. we only took the audio track and put it with the video track.”— James Keith McElveenClarified the scope of the witness's recent work on the restaurant footage.Open in transcript →Watch this moment ▶
testimony highlightMcElveen said he was not provided the audio from Wendi Adelson's July 18, 2014 law-enforcement interview and did not recall receiving the call at the end of that interview.Open in transcript →Watch this moment ▶

Day 5

ProceduralRichardson Hearing — McElveen Enhanced Recording & Search Warrant Photos1highlightMentioned

Summary

The court found an inadvertent discovery violation involving an enhanced recording but no prejudice, and deferred review of newly disclosed search-warrant photographs.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Highlights (1)

rulingThe court found an inadvertent discovery violation concerning the enhanced version of Mr. McElveen's recording, which had not been provided with the original recording.Open in transcript →Watch this moment ▶