“Mr. Stanford is not currently an employee of the Laboratory. As general policy, because of employee privacy, the Laboratory does not discuss personnel matters,” LANL Spokesperson Kevin Roark said.
Stanford, 56, was formally charged Monday, Feb. 4 with battery and assault against a female employee at the Laboratory.
The charges stem from a sexual harassment case filed against Stanford by his employee who stated that Stanford behaved inappropriately toward her on several occasions including in an elevator Nov. 28 at the Laboratory’s Emergency Operations Center on West Jemez Road.
She also states that Stanford made inappropriate comments and exhibited inappropriate behavior in his office at the EOC and while riding together in LANL vehicles to meetings.
The employee reported Stanford’s behavior Jan. 14 to Los Alamos police detectives who launched an investigation into the case. She told detectives that it all began with a comment Stanford made to her in the parking lot outside of work, according to her statements in the police report.
The employee reported that Stanford told her that he found her very attractive and “if she wasn`t married he would pursue her hard.” She added that Stanford later made a comment that she was a “sensuous and sensual women” and he told her he was having a hard time concentrating when she was around.
She told police that after a month of this type of behavior, Stanford began to proposition her for sex and she went into more detail and more incidents throughout her typed statement.
According to the police report, the woman also said that Stanford gave her a Christmas gift of two watches in December, telling her not to tell her husband about the more expensive watch.
The woman provided emails between Stanford and her that corroborated some of the information she was reporting, according to the police report. As part of their investigation, detectives also obtained a subpoena, which they presented to LANL’s legal office requesting records related to the case from LANL’s Human Resources Department.
In the report police received from LANL, there is an email dated Dec. 18, 2012 at 5:11 p.m. from Stanford to the employee stating, “I am ok w/ you letting (your husband) know that you got the first fun watch – it isn`t that expensive – your call, just let me know.”
Also, in the police report when detectives questioned Stanford about whether he ever propositioned the employee for sex, he said that he did and that she replied, “not gonna happen.”
When questioned as to his intent in asking her that, Stanford said he had no intent on having an affair with her … that it was `flirtatious.”
Stanford also made the statement that he “obviously” offended the employee and he wished “she would have been more upfront with him.”
Police have issued Stanford a summons to appear in Los Alamos Magistrate Court.