Attorneys argue evidence before Ian Cranston murder trial; opening statements set to begin

(Update: Video, other evidence argued before opening statements)

Jurors selected from a pool of more than 100 people

BEND, Ore. (KTVZ) -- It's been more than a year since the fatal shooting of Barry Washington Jr. in downtown Bend.

On Wednesday, jury selection took place for Ian Cranston, the man accused of murder and manslaughter in that fatal shooting.

Cranston’s defense attorney, Kevin Sali, and Deschutes County Deputy District Attorney Brooks McClain questioned a group of at least 100 jurors to determine whether they were suitable to hear the case and render a fair, impartial verdict.

Opening statements were set to begin Thursday afternoon. Thursday morning, prosecutors and defense attorneys made their arguments before Judge Beth Bagley on evidence they want included or excluded during the trial.

Deputy District Attorney Brooks McClain presented video taken at the shooting scene, claiming it showed Cranston did not render aid to Washington after the shooting, as the defense claimed.

Regarding the defense claim that some evidence from Washington’s phone was obtained illegally, McClain said while the search warrant was intended for location data, the entire contents of the cellphone was presented to defense attorney Kevin Sali by Deputy DA J. Michael Swart.

Sali claimed Washington used language in that phone info including the term “bloods,” but said Washington’s mother indicated he used it as a term of endearment among friends and relatives.

On Wednesday, About 25 prospective jurors were questioned at a time to see if they could set aside personal convictions and be impartial throughout the proceedings of the case.

When questions about gun ownership were posed, some potential jurors expressed their aversion to guns.

One woman argued that shooting to kill is likely not justified when a person can run away, or shoot an aggressor in the foot. She grappled with the term "lethal force."

Preconceived notions and personal sentiments aside, the attorneys’ brought questions back to establishing whether jurors could make decisions based on evidence presented and state law.

A few people were excused for their inability to be impartial.

Sali posed many questions, including:

“Does anybody feel that it’s a bad rule that Ian Cranston had to prove his shot was lawful beyond a reasonable doubt?”

Sali explained the question was to see if anyone struggled with accepting the law. By law, the state will have to prove that lethal force was not justified under self-defense for a jury to render a guilty verdict.

Another question: “Has anyone heard anything today that makes you think you may be less impartial?"

Sali also asked, “Does anyone have a tendency to view the case with a racial motivation to right the scales?”

He also stated that there is no evidence the case brought forth by prosecutors is racially motivated.

Prosecutor McClain asked the jurors questions, such as:

“Does anyone have a perception of what a person who commits murder looks like?”

One prospective juror shared that Cranston looked like his grandson, who he’s very fond of, but concluded that his verdict will be based on presented facts.

McClain also asked, “Do you think it’s your role to decide whether Cranston or Washington are good or bad people?”

To which the prospective jurors agreed it was not.

During the time NewsChannel21 was present, the prospective jurors agreed their personal preferences would not interfere with the case.

Circuit Judge Beth Bagley chimed in to clarify terms like "beyond a reasonable doubt," explaining it’s a matter of "eliminating all reasonable doubt until you are convinced,” and said it’s the highest legal standard of proof. 

The selection process concluded Wednesday and opening statements begin Thursday.