VALPARAISO, Ind. — Few potential jurors in Porter County said they knew about the near-fatal shooting of Indianapolis police officer Jason Fishburn last year, but jury selection at his alleged assailant’s trial Monday still took a full day.

The attempted-murder case’s difficult nature left plenty to discuss as Marion County prosecutors and defense attorneys for Brian Reese whittled the group of more than 30 to seven men and five women. Two women will serve as alternate jurors.

Among the questions posed: Does shooting a gun at someone always imply an intent to kill? Can you set aside your sympathy for a victim who’s a police officer and base your judgment solely on the evidence?

And, would references to unrelated crimes or drug use by the defendant color your assessment of his guilt?

All of those issues are likely to recur during the trial, which begins today with opening statements and likely will last all week or longer. The trial was moved to Porter County because heavy media coverage in Indianapolis might have biased jurors.

Prosecutor Carl Brizzi plans to call Fishburn, 30, today as the first witness; Fishburn’s wife, Tonya, will follow so they can observe the rest of the trial. Fishburn returned to work in May on limited administrative duty.

Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department Chief Michael Spears stopped by the small, ornate courtroom Monday afternoon and said he hoped to attend for another day or two.

Fishburn doesn’t remember the day in July 2008 when he was shot while chasing Reese on foot. Shots struck his head and protective vest during the pursuit on Indianapolis’ Eastside. His head wound and brain injuries almost proved fatal.

Reese’s lawyers dispute that he intended to kill Fishburn, an element necessary to prove attempted murder. That charge carries a penalty of 20 to 50 years in prison. He also is charged with resisting law enforcement and carrying a handgun without a license, which could boost his sentence to 59 years if he is convicted on all counts.

Judge Lisa Borges swore in the jury just before 4 p.m. Monday.

Defense attorney David Shircliff said afterward that he was gratified many jurors said they could imagine several reasons to fire a gun besides intending to kill.

Potential jurors who were dismissed did not learn why unless it was for a potential conflict, as with a woman whose father had been slain.

Some choices posed tough calls for attorneys on each side. Before being removed, one woman said she could fairly assess the intent issue, but she also said the wounding of a police officer would “affect you more” because of his role “as someone there to protect all of us.”