Chris von Keyserling. Photo: / Helen Neafsey.
Christopher von Keyserling, 71, was arrested in Greenwich Town Hall on Wednesday afternoon and charged with fourth-degree sexual assault, police said. He posted $2,500 bond and was released to appear in court on Jan. 25.
The incident began at about noon Dec. 8 when the 57-year-old woman encountered von Keyserling in the hallway of an unnamed town facility, the warrant said.
The two briefly spoke about politics and the woman told him that “it was a new world politically” and he had to educate his fellow politicians, the warrant said. Von Keyserling is a member of Greenwich’s Representative Town Meeting.
He allegedly replied: “I love this new world, I no longer have to be politically correct,” according to the warrant.
She told him that if he was “proud of that I can’t help you,” after which he called her a lazy, bloodsucking union employee, the warrant said.
[…]
As she walked by, he allegedly pinched her in the groin area, according to the warrant. She threatened to punch him if he ever did that again, the warrant said.She said he “looked back with a really evil look in his eyes and said, ‘it would be your word against mine and nobody will believe you,'” according to the warrant.
[…]
Reached by phone, von Keyserling deferred comment to his attorney, Phil Russell. “It’s a sad situation,” von Keyserling said.
Russell said the incident in question, at the Nathaniel Witherell Home, could not be described as sexual or aggressive in nature. He said the charge stemmed from a “jocular” moment with a woman at a gathering at the town-owned senior facility.
“In almost 30 years of practicing law in this town, I would say Mr. von Keyserling is the one person I would never suspect of having any inappropriate sexual predilections,” Russell said, noting his client is in his 70s.
“There was a playful gesture, in front of witnesses. It was too trivial to be considered anything of significance. To call it a sexual assault is not based in reality,” the lawyer said.
And there we are, in a reality where open sexual assault is no more than a “playful gesture”. I have an idea that Mr. von Keyserling might not find people deciding to pinch his penis as jocular play. Since the election of Pussy Grabber-elect, we will no doubt be seeing much more of this; assholes all over using the excuse of “hey I don’t need to be politically correct anymore!” as the rallying cry for indecent behaviour.
Via Daily Voice and Greenwich Time.
Wait now… the lawyer says it was “in front of witnesses”, but the guy says “it’s your word against mine”? Something doesn’t scan…
The whole “it’s your word against mine” is a red flag of just how sleazy von Keyserling is, and that’s he spent a lifetime counting on male privilege to rule the day.
Both articles point out that the camera footage supports the woman’s account. My best guess is that von Keyserling was simply going by his usual ‘out’ for bad behaviour without updating for this century.
I get what you’re saying. I guess what boggles my mind is that he apparently thought the “your word” thing would fly when there were third parties present (not to mention security cameras). That’s a whole other level of arrogant stupidity.
If it were a playful gesture between close friends, the woman would not have any need to press any charges or complaints.
But I think there is a relatively widespread trope about women luring unsuspecting men into flirting with them in order to ruin their careers in this “overly PC culture” or somesuch.
1. Please name all the incidences when somebody grabs someone’s crotch in a non-sexual manner. Describe how this applies to this situation.
2. Please wave a lot of hands to make us forget about the pussy grabbing video in this context (preferably until your wrists crack from the strain).
3. Yeah, when two people make a joke together it’s totally normal that one of them goes to the police.
Even in a consenting, playful context, pinching another person’s genitals in public would be really fucking odd and socially inappropriate. Ignoring the victim’s account, ignoring the security footage, ignoring what witnesses saw, his own defense is unbelievably bad.
I wonder what the significance of his age is supposed to be in all this. Is it supposed to imply he’s too old to be interested in any sort of sexual activity, including assault? Is it the classic ‘product of a different era’ defence? Or is he ‘too set in his ways’, arguably a variation of the era theme but still distinct in my mind. The next question then is which of these is the least worst defence.
I said elseplace, the assailant also claimed that he and the victim “have that kind of relationship.” I read that and I hear him admitting that he’s been sexually harassing her for years. In addition, the Daily Voice article says he has behaved this way towards two other employees-- so he’s a serial sexual harasser/assaulter.