Potential jurors questioned in Jewish Federation shooting case

Potential jurors in the case against accused Jewish Federation shooter Naveed Haq answered probing questions Wednesday about their experiences with mental illness and violence, their opinions about race and religion, and their media habits.

About 100 possible jurors remain, whittled down from an initial group of nearly 400, as attorneys began their difficult search for a fair and balanced jury for Haq's upcoming murder trial.

Twenty-seven jurors were questioned individually on Wednesday, so their answers would not affect other potential jurors. At least 10 were excused for reasons including an inability to track lawyers' questions and strong beliefs about the July 28, 2006, shooting that left one woman dead and five others injured at the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle.

Haq, 32, has pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity to one count of aggravated first-degree murder, five counts of attempted first-degree murder and a slew of other charges, including malicious harassment — the state's hate-crime law.

King County Superior Court Judge Paris Kallas also ruled Wednesday that Haq's defense attorneys must prove Haq was insane the day he barged into the federation's Belltown offices with two guns and a knife, allegedly spouting anti-Semitic statements.

The attorneys had sought to have the burden of proof lie with the state, which will argue that Haq was not insane at the time and carried out the alleged crimes with intent.

The ruling was one of several important pretrial decisions Kallas will make in the upcoming days before the start of testimony April 14.

The remaining potential jurors will return to court today and Monday for individual questioning based on answers they gave to an eight-page questionnaire exploring, among other topics, their religious and political beliefs, their training and education, their knowledge of the case and their experience with the law. A jury of 12 plus two alternates should be empaneled by the end of next week.

Many pointed questions focused Wednesday on potential jurors' beliefs about whether the insanity defense in general is a legitimate legal tool or a sham or loophole, highlighting what likely will be one of the most difficult aspects of the case for the defense.

Though several jurors expressed what appeared to be a hostility to the insanity defense in their questionnaires, most said when questioned in person that they felt they could put any preconceived notions aside for a trial.

Some, however, were excused based on the strength of their statements about various aspects of the case. "To me, this was an attack on the Jewish faith," said one person who was later excused. Another who told the court, "I sincerely believe in Mr. Haq's guilt in this case," was also excused.

Next week Kallas will rule on how much, if any, of a recorded statement to police made by Haq shortly after the shooting will be allowed as evidence.

Prosecutors have conceded that some of the interview is inadmissible because Seattle police detectives didn't respond immediately to Haq's six requests for an attorney during the 55-minute questioning session.

Defense attorneys argue the entire statement, as well as other evidence possibly obtained through information Haq gave police, is inadmissible.

Natalie Singer: 206-464-2704 or nsinger@seattletimes.com