Deposition excerpt featuring use of racial slur and exhibit identification dispute
Summary
The passage contains a contentious exchange over a racial slur during a deposition, but it mentions only low‑level participants (Mr. Leopold, Mr. Tein) and provides no concrete leads about financial f Witness uses the word "Niggaa" in response to a question. Counsel (Mr. Leopold) requests the word be spelled for the record. Dispute over whether the document is marked as an exhibit (exhibit 31-001)
This document is from the House Oversight Committee Releases.
View Source CollectionPersons Referenced (2)
Tags
Related Documents (6)
Deposition excerpt showing contested attorney‑client privilege claims
The passage records a routine deposition dispute over privilege and mentions a lawyer (Jeffrey Herman) filing a lawsuit, but provides no concrete details about transactions, high‑level officials, or w Mr. Tein accuses Mr. Leopold of missing a hearing and obstructing the deposition. Reference to a lawyer named Jeffrey Herman filing a lawsuit on the witness’s behalf. Debate over whether attorney‑cli
Deposition Dispute Over Exhibit Marking in House Oversight Hearing
The passage records a procedural disagreement about marking exhibits during a deposition. It mentions no high‑ranking officials, financial transactions, or substantive allegations of misconduct, offer Mr. Leopold threatens court sanctions if exhibits are removed unmarked. Mr. Tein disputes the claim that exhibits are unmarked. Mr. Goldberger references long‑standing practice without prior disputes
Transcript excerpt showing a contentious deposition exchange with no clear high‑profile actors
The passage records a heated deposition dialogue but lacks any identifiable influential individuals, concrete transactions, dates, or substantive allegations. It offers minimal investigative value bey A deposition was cancelled and later reinstated without clear reason. Mr. Tein expresses frustration over the cancellation and mentions a personal impact on 'Jack'. Mr. Leopold and Mr. Goldberger are
Transcript excerpt from House Oversight deposition showing heated exchange over exhibit handling
The passage records a minor procedural dispute in a deposition with no concrete allegations, names, dates, or financial details. It offers little investigative value beyond confirming normal courtroom Mr. Tein accuses Mr. Leopold of misrepresenting the record. Dispute over labeling and copying of exhibits. Witness expresses willingness to disagree professionally.
Transcript excerpt showing vague deposition scheduling and attorney-client privilege references
The passage provides only a fragmented courtroom/house oversight interview with minor, unnamed individuals (Mr. Leopold, Mr. Goldberger, Mr. Tein). It lacks concrete details on transactions, dates, or Witness mentions meeting with Mr. Leopold to prepare for a deposition. Mr. Leopold allegedly could not attend due to a court appearance. Reference to an email from Mr. Leopold to Mr. Goldberger.
Deposition excerpt referencing a $50‑million lawsuit filed by Mr. Herman and attorney‑client privilege objections
The passage provides a vague reference to a high‑value lawsuit ($50 million) filed by an individual named Mr. Herman, but offers no concrete details about the parties, the nature of the claim, or any Mr. Herman filed a $50‑million lawsuit on behalf of an unnamed client. The deposition includes repeated attorney‑client privilege objections by Mr. Tein and Mr. Leopold. The excerpt suggests a press
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.