It’s been interesting… rather inadvertently revelatory… to witness the fallout from one of the oddest political scandals in Vermont history — Rep. Mary Morrissey getting caught wet-handed*, repeatedly dumping water into a tote bag belonging to fellow Bennington Rep. Jim Carroll.

*Rimshot

On the official front, all parties are continuing their lengthy effort to sweep as much of this mess under the nearest rug as thoroughly as possible. On the media front, the coverage has been a mixed bag. On the personal front, both Carroll and Morrissey are flailing in the aftermath. And pretty much everyone is clearly uncomfortable with the situation.

It makes sense, really. This thing is, as Rep. Angela Arsenault told Seven Days’ Kevin McCallum “both juvenile and unconscionable.” To Carroll, already suffering through a difficult session thanks to his February DUI citation in a Statehouse parking lot, it must have caused significant emotional trauma. Arsenault:

“This is the type of thing that is designed to make someone feel like they are going nuts, to make someone question themselves, which to me is straight up cruel.”

Morrissey has confined her public-facing reaction to a prepared statement that fails to rise to the occasion:

“I want to say how very, very sorry I am for my actions of pouring water into Jim Carroll’s tote bag. Quite honestly, I don’t know why I did it. I was not meaning to hurt him. It is something very out of character for me and I am ashamed. I have personally apologized to Jim and I am publicly apologizing to Jim and the legislative body in this statement. I will take every step that is needed to repair what I have done.”

I’m sorry, but no. If she doesn’t know why she did it, well, she needs to undertake some serious self-examination. She had to know it would hurt Carroll, and it’s hard to imagine any other motivation for her actions. After all, she did this repeatedly over a period of months — and she apparently picked up the pace after Carroll’s DUI. That bit about “very out of character” is a copout. You do something over and over and over and over again for a long time and only stop when you get caught, you are acting very much in character.

Also, the two “verys” are a nice touch, but I think this qualifies as at least a three-very offense if not more.

And a written statement isn’t enough. A wide-open press conference is a necessary next step, plus at least one public meeting with the constituents who elected her and will have to decide whether she is worthy of sending back to Montpelier.

As for Carroll, well, he’s been all over the place. He initially refused to release the incriminating videos, arguing that they were personal property and not subject to public records law. Which is nonsense because they were taken in a public space, involved wrongdoing by a public official, and had long ago been turned over to House leadership and the Capitol police. Carroll only relented, so he said, in the face of “continued and more amplified media criticism, litigation and continued warnings of more litigation to follow.”

Oh, okay, so it’s the media’s fault. Yeesh.

Carroll then added, “I believe it is right that I release the video and be fully transparent to my constituents and all Vermonters.”

Oh, c’mon, which is it? Did you release the video on principle or out of fear of criticism and litigation? He seems to be taking the low road and the high road at the same time, which seems rather perilous for someone facing a DUI charge.

I’m sorry, too soon?

House leadership had done its level best to keep this out of the spotlight. It’s unclear exactly when they were first informed, but it was some time ago. McCallum reports that Carroll “initially told his committee chair, Rep. Mike Marcotte,” about it. Initially as in January? February? March? Carroll went to Speaker Jill Krowinski and the Capitol Police at some point and was told that nothing could be done without evidence. He then set up his little camera and caught Morrissey twice — on March April 23 and 26*. He took the footage to Krowinski. After that, in late March or early April, Krowinski confronted Morrissey (who initially denied responsibility, which is a laugh) and arranged what Carroll called “a very uncomfortable meeting” with the two lawmakers. At some point thereafter Krowinski imposed a mild punishment, barring Morrissey from sitting on House-Senate conference committees. And she told Carroll to file an ethics complaint.

That was at least two months ago*. Considering that the ethics process is a black box, impenetrable to public view, we might never have learned of this at all if not for McCallum. Certainly no one in leadership saw any need to inform the voters who installed them in positions of public service.

*Correction: Seven Days got the dates wrong. The videos were shot on April 23 and 26, not March. This significantly changes the timeline of events. Still, more than a month has passed since the videos were shared with leadership.

Speaking of McCallum and his colleagues, most of our media outlets have been playing catchup with a pair of curious exceptions. Vermont Public’s “coverage” consists of a June 11 interview with McCallum on “Vermont Edition.” No original reporting. Even worse, as of early evening on June 12, VTDigger has yet to even acknowledge the story, much less publish its own account. McCallum broke the story on June 7. I don’t know what the hell to make of Digger’s silence. It is, after all, the only organization that employs a full-time Statehouse bureau. (I will update this when/if Digger publishes an original story.)

Our TV outlets jumped on the story as soon as Carroll released the video, because TV can’t cover anything without pictures.

Carroll and Morrissey’s hometown paper, the Bennington Banner, reacted to the story with the combo platter of caution, deference and cowardice characteristic of the community’s approach to civic misbehavior. Its story was published on June 11 and weirdly entitled “Reps. Carroll, Morrissey comment on water soaking incidents at Statehouse.” Hard to imagine a more neutral headline for such a bizarre series of events.

The story covers the basics without any particular push to advance things. It writes that Morrissey “told the Banner,” which implies some kind of unique communication but the quote is nothing but her prepared statement. It otherwise leans heavily on written statements and McCallum’s reporting. It fails to produce anything insightful, deliver direct statements from Carroll or Morrissey or try to get reaction from local civic and political leaders.

The dominant theme in the official and reportorial response is ambivalence — aside from McCallum, whose reporting stands alone in advancing the story and forcing it into public view. I suppose there are those among my readers who would rather the story had been kept under wraps. I could hardly disagree more. This incident might seem trivial, as in many ways it is, but it had an undeniable impact on Carroll and was a gross violation of whatever written or unwritten code there is regarding Statehouse polity. It’s a serious matter when one lawmaker treats another with such disrespect. It’s something the people deserve to know about when an elected official acts like a schoolyard bully.

Vermonters don’t like embarrassment. But sometimes we just need to live with it. We shouldn’t turn away. Nor should our news media.