Mr. Tein
Examining attorney
Mentioned in 5 documents. Roles: Examining attorney, opposing counsel, Questioning attorney, The attorney conducting the deposition
Mr. Tein is mentioned in documents or reporting related to the Epstein case. Being mentioned does not imply any wrongdoing, criminal conduct, or inappropriate behavior.
At a Glance
Click values for sourcesSources
5 sources for document mentions
Fragmented House Oversight Transcript with No Substantive Claims
2025-11-11
“The passage consists of disjointed dialogue from a hearing with no concrete allegations, names, date”
Transcript excerpt showing heated exchange between Mr. Tein and Mr. Leopold during House Oversight hearing
2025-11-11
“The passage contains only a brief, uncited dialogue with no names of high‑profile officials, no fina”
Heated exchange between Mr. Tein and Mr. Leopold during House Oversight hearing
2025-11-11
“The passage records a confrontational dialogue with no concrete allegations, dates, financial detail”
Deposition Dispute Over Exhibit Marking in House Oversight Hearing
2025-11-11
“The passage records a procedural disagreement about marking exhibits during a deposition. It mention”
Fragmented transcript from House Oversight hearing with unclear references to a person named Jeff and a massage
2025-11-11
“The passage consists of disjointed dialogue fragments lacking clear names, dates, transactions, or s”
Sources
1 source for known connections
Co-Document Mentions
“Named alongside other network members in 48 documents”
Known Connections (6)
Document Mentions (34)
Fragmented House Oversight Transcript with No Substantive Claims
The passage consists of disjointed dialogue from a hearing with no concrete allegations, names, dates, or financial details. It offers no actionable leads or novel information about influential actors Contains brief mentions of Mr. Tein, Mr. Leopold, and Mr. Goldberger. References attorney-client privilege objections. No specific misconduct, transactions, or policy issues identified.
Transcript excerpt showing heated exchange between Mr. Tein and Mr. Leopold during House Oversight hearing
The passage contains only a brief, uncited dialogue with no names of high‑profile officials, no financial or misconduct details, and no actionable leads. It offers no novel or controversial informatio Shows a tense interaction between two participants in a House Oversight hearing No substantive allegations, dates, transactions, or policy issues are mentioned
Heated exchange between Mr. Tein and Mr. Leopold during House Oversight hearing
The passage records a confrontational dialogue with no concrete allegations, dates, financial details, or links to high‑level officials. It offers minimal investigative value beyond noting a possible Mr. Tein accuses Mr. Leopold of lying in a letter to co‑counsel. Both parties exchange threats of sanctions and accusations of obstruction. The exchange occurs during a House Oversight session (docum
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
Fragmented transcript from House Oversight hearing with unclear references to a person named Jeff and a massage
The passage consists of disjointed dialogue fragments lacking clear names, dates, transactions, or substantive allegations. It provides no actionable leads, novel information, or connections to high‑r Mentions a person named Jeff and a massage context References a Mr. Leopold and a Mr. Tein Appears to be from a House Oversight hearing transcript dated 01/24/23
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
Deposition excerpt shows heated exchange among attorneys with no substantive allegations
The passage is a routine courtroom deposition transcript featuring lawyers arguing over procedure. It contains no names of influential actors, no financial or misconduct details, and offers no actiona The excerpt records a dispute between attorneys (Mr. Tein, Mr. Goldberger, Mr. Leopold) about taking No mention of any high‑profile individuals, agencies, or controversial actions. The content is pro
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.
Deposition exchange between Mr. Tein and Mr. Leopold shows procedural dispute over break timing
The passage is a routine courtroom dialogue about taking a break, with no mention of influential actors, financial transactions, or misconduct. It offers no actionable leads for investigation. Mr. Tein repeatedly orders Mr. Leopold to take a five‑minute break. The exchange highlights a dispute over deposition timing and record preservation. No names of high‑profile officials, agencies, or financia
Courtroom exchange featuring Mr. Leopold and Mr. Tein with vague references to surveillance and name‑tag switching
The excerpt contains a disjointed transcript with no concrete names, dates, transactions, or actionable details. It hints at someone being searched for and a possible surveillance incident, but provid Witness mentions being aware that 'people were looking for me' without identifying who they were. Reference to a night when the witness and a friend 'switched name tags' – unclear relevance. Repeated
Fragmented House Oversight Transcript with Minimal Content
The passage consists of disjointed dialogue with no concrete names, dates, transactions, or substantive allegations. It offers no actionable leads, novel information, or connections to high‑ranking of Contains brief exchange between individuals identified only as MR. LEOPOLD and MR. TEIN. Mentions a question about family members speaking to reporters, but no specifics are provided. No clear refere
Deposition excerpt showing attorney objections to questions about witness Saige's alleged false statements
The passage provides a narrow view of a courtroom exchange with no named high‑profile officials, financial details, or foreign actors. It suggests a possible dispute over a witness’s testimony but lac Attorney Mr. Tein questions witness Saige about alleged lies to avoid deposition and subpoena. Attorney Mr. Leopold repeatedly objects to the form of the questions, citing lack of foundation. The wit
Incoherent Deposition Transcript with No Clear Leads
The passage consists of fragmented dialogue and nonsensical references without any identifiable actors, transactions, dates, or substantive allegations. It offers no actionable investigative leads and Mentions individuals named Mr. Tein, Mr. Leopold, and Mr. Goldberger, but no context or relevance. Reference to an Exhibit 18-001 and a deposition, but no details on subject matter. No mention of hig
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.
Transcript excerpt shows obscure witness questioning about reporters and alleged drug arrest
The passage provides vague, fragmented testimony with no concrete names, dates, financial amounts, or clear links to high‑level officials. It mentions a witness, their mother and her husband Paul, but Witness repeatedly denied any contact with reporters or receipt of money. Reference to an alleged drug arrest and cooperation, but no details. Names mentioned: Mr. Tein, Mr. Leopold, Paul (husband of
Showing 15 of 34 documents. View all →
This dossier on Mr. Tein was compiled from court records, flight logs, and public documents. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.