Proceedings in the trial of a Minot man were halted abruptly during jury selection after the judge ordered a change of venue due to publicity from local media coverage.

Shawnee Krall, 30, Minot, was set to appear for a 10- day jury trial for the 2020 murder of Alice Quierolo, 29, but concerns were raised by court-appointed attorney Stormy Vickers leading up to and during jury selection that his client would not be able to receive a fair trial in Ward County.

“The publicity is very damaging to his case,” Vickers said. “There have been reports which reference the suppressed evidence. That information is highly prejudicial to Mr. Krall.”

These concerns were shared by District Judge Stacy Louser and acknowledged by Ward County State’s Attorney staff. Jury selection was extended into Wednesday afternoon, with an additional pool of potential jurors called in to mitigate these concerns. However, despite Louser admonishing potential jurors to avoid any exposure to media coverage surrounding the case, multiple potential jurors said they had knowledge of media reports made this week.

Other potential jurors admitted the coverage had made them aware of suppressed evidence in the case, which has been documented and covered in the three years since Krall was charged. The North Dakota Supreme Court upheld the suppression in 2023.

Information was also shared by a potential juror that one of his children’s classes at a local high school was visited by a law enforcement detective, who shared information in the case that had been suppressed with the students, an event that Louser called, “beyond the pale.”

“The issue is the media coverage is not going to stop. Though jurors have been admonished, as we’ve seen today, that’s not very effective,” Vickers said. “I’m concerned that this is something that’s been in the consciousness of the community for some time. There’s no effective way to ferret all that out.”

Assistant State’s Attorney Stephenie Davis said she understood and shared Vicker’s concerns, but in a state as small as North Dakota, “it doesn’t matter where the trial happens, people are going to be aware of it.”

Davis told the court the state was trying to be optimistic, and they had specifically tailored their questions for the jurors to root out any potential connections that might exist among the array of witnesses scheduled to testify in the case.

Louser stated her concerns had only grown in the last 24 hours, saying it was especially discouraging to hear so many potential jurors, who previously had limited to no exposure to the information surrounding the case, return and reverse their answers completely.

Louser ultimately ordered for a change in venue but didn’t know at that time whether the case would be heard in Burleigh or Cass County. Louser admonished local media outlets, saying, “It was terrible judgment” to include the suppressed information in their coverage of the proceedings.