Updated at 7:14 p.m.

A Madras bison rancher who has had disputes with the Bureau of Land Management was seated in the jury box Wednesday beside an outdoors enthusiast and birdwatcher who called Malheur National Wildlife Refuge "a very special place" and couldn't understand why anyone would trespass there.

Thus began jury selection in the federal conspiracy prosecution stemming from the 41-day occupation of the federal wildlife sanctuary in Harney County. Ammon Bundy and six other defendants have pleaded not guilty to conspiring to impede federal workers from carrying out their work at the eastern Oregon refuge.

U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown excused 11 of 31 potential jurors after she spent four hours questioning each member of the panel, then allowed a final hour for lawyers to wrangle over who should be disqualified from jury duty. Each person summoned Wednesday wore a number on a white badge clipped to their shirt and were not identified. The judge worked through lunch, allowing only brief restroom breaks.

Most of the 31 potential jurors summoned said they had not followed much of the news coverage of the refuge occupation. Several told the court they're really not "news watchers" or are distrustful of the media. One West Linn man called the refuge event Oregon's "moment in the spotlight," while another said it was quickly overtaken by "Donald and Hillary'' and the U.S. presidential campaign. One man said he was familiar with "just the Bundy name."

The people summoned already had been whittled down from the approximately 340 who had completed a written questionnaire sent to them months ago. Another 60 potential jurors will be called to court on Thursday and another 60 Friday.

The judge said she expects to seat 12 jurors and eight alternates by the end of this week, with opening statements tentatively set for next Tuesday. Brown said she expects the trial evidence to be presented over nine weeks, followed by jury deliberations.

On Wednesday, three people were excused for cause: the man who said he'd be hesitant to follow the law if he disagreed with it; the birdwatcher who said he was "very angry" when he first learned of the refuge takeover and admitted that he can't say the anger has subsided; and the retired woman who called the refuge occupation an "ill-conceived plan" involving "extremists," and who when asked if she could weigh the facts in the case without her personal ideas influencing her responded, "I think I can.''

Eight others were excused for hardships, such as pending dental appointments, a spouse facing possible surgery, the need to care for an elderly mother and prearranged travel plans. A woman who said she was homeless and wasn't sure where she'd be when the trial began also was excused.

Defense lawyers unsuccessfully tried to exclude three others in the jury pool, including one man who answered on his questionnaire that he believed that a crime had been committed at the refuge, but on further questioning said he could be an impartial trier of fact at trial.

"There's not a sufficient showing to challenge the juror," the judge ruled.

Defendant Kenneth Medenbach, 63, wore a specially-designed black shirt for his court appearance on the first day of jury selection Wednesday. He said he bought the shirt for $5 and paid $12 to have the words woven into the shirt. On its back, writing in white quoted a federal 1979 case, suggesting the jury has a "prerogative to disregard instructions of the judge...'' (Courtesy of Kenneth Medenbach

Defense lawyers also attempted to disqualify a woman who teaches in a Washington County graduate equivalency diploma program. She told the court that she at first was "a little angry'' about what happened at the refuge, and had heard on the news that someone had pleaded guilty. Defense lawyer Robert Salisbury read from her juror questionnaire, in which she wrote, "I believe it's wrong for these defendants to take over a public space. I believe they broke the law."

Assistant U.S. Attorney Ethan Knight objected, pointing out that the woman told the court Wednesday she could keep an "open mind" and could set aside her personal views. The judge kept her in the pool.

The defense also was unsuccessful in arguing for an employee of the Bonneville Power Administration to be ejected. She talked about her belief that there are benefits from federal management of public property. Defendant Ryan Bundy argued that she showed a "clear bias," but Knight countered that she said she could be fair and impartial at trial.

Finally, prosecutors called for the disqualification of the Madras rancher. Knight said his answers in court were inconsistent with written answers to the juror questionnaire. But the judge countered that the rancher expressly told her, "I think I can be a judge to rule on the facts." The judge kept him in the pool.

The judge questioned the panel on whether they would follow the law even if they felt "pangs of conscience" and might not agree with it. She asked whether anyone had been handed a brochure about jury nullification outside the courthouse. One man said he had, but he didn't take it.

The judge asked if anyone was a member of the Mormon church, to which several of the defendants belong, and one of 31 people said yes. She queried them about their exposure and familiarity with what occurred at the refuge this past winter, as well as their thoughts about the First and Second Amendments.

Sixteen women and 15 men showed up for jury selection Wednesday. Of those, there was one African American man and one Asian woman. Their occupations ranged from dentist and physical education teacher (the judge suggested he could lead exercise classes during breaks), to a Les Schwab Tire Centers worker and federal Bonneville Power Administration employee. One woman said she was unemployed and saw the jury duty as an "opportunity," and another said her co-worker described her summons as "a golden ticket.''

Several said they were from the Salem area and complained about the traffic to Portland. One man who lives on Oregon's southern border with California said it took him 41/2 hours to drive to Portland. Another who lives on the coast said she's 72.8 miles away from the courthouse, just under the 75-mile distance that allows the court to put a juror up at a local hotel during a trial.

"I hope you understand how important this is to the parties, to the jurors, to everyone," Brown said, thanking the 31 people summoned for their time.

Most of the defendants sat quietly through the proceeding. Defendants Ryan Bundy and Shawna Cox each recommended jurors to disqualify, commenting on their perceived biases.

Defendant Kenneth Medenbach, who is out of custody on pretrial release, sat in the back of the courtroom Wednesday beside his standby lawyer, wearing a distinct black dress shirt that had white writing woven into the fabric on the front and back, with the words "U.S Constitution" written down one arm and "Bill of Rights'' down the other.

Email that U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown sent to defendant Kenneth Medenbach Wednesday afternoon, after learning of the shirt he wore to court. (Courtesy of Kenneth Medenbach)

The back of his shirt read, "Jury Rights -- 'The pages of history shine on instances of the jury's exercise of its prerogative to disregard instructions of the judge...'''

Medenbach said he bought the shirt for $5 and had the writing added for $12. He said he wasn't sure whether the judge would throw him in jail. The judge made no comment about it in court.

But by late Wednesday afternoon, after learning about the shirt, the judge sent Medenbach an email informing him that he could not wear it because the message is an "impermissible argument to the jury" and thus prohibited.

"I've already made clear on the record that a "jury-nullification" argument is contrary to law and may not be presented to jurors," she continued. "Do not wear that shirt again; do not display any other message via your clothing or otherwise while you are in Courtroom 9A for the trial."

-- Maxine Bernstein

mbernstein@oregonian.com

503-221-8212

@maxoregonian