MINNEAPOLIS • Attorneys in the trial of a former Minneapolis police officer charged in George Floyd’s death probed potential jurors Wednesday about their attitudes toward police, trying to determine whether they’re more inclined to believe testimony from law enforcement over evidence from other witnesses to the fatal confrontation.

Judge Peter Cahill seated two more jurors to go with the three picked Tuesday for Derek Chauvin’s trial on second-degree murder and manslaughter charges. It’s been a grinding process during which attorneys ask prospective jurors one by one whether they could keep an open mind, what they think of the criminal justice system and racial justice issues, how they resolve conflicts and much more.

In a separate development, the Minnesota Supreme Court declined to hear Chauvin’s appeal to block a third-degree murder charge from being reinstated. At issue is whether the conviction of another former Minneapolis police officer in the unrelated killing of an Australian woman established a precedent for prosecutors to restore a third-degree murder count that the trial judge dismissed earlier. The Minnesota Court of Appeals last week said it settled the law with its ruling last month affirming the conviction of Mohamed Noor in the 2017 shooting death of Justine Ruszczyk Damond.

The new decision from the state’s highest court left open the possibility that Cahill could add the charge back, lessening the chances that Chauvin’s trial would be delayed over the dispute. The conventional legal wisdom is that giving the jury another option for convicting Chauvin of murder raises the chance of a conviction.

Cahill noted the ruling during a break and told the prosecution and defense that they’ll discuss next steps Thursday morning before jury selection begins for the day. He noted that there are still some legal issues left to be decided before resolving that dispute.

The first juror picked Wednesday, a man who works in sales management and grew up in a mostly white part of central Minnesota, acknowledged saying on his written questionnaire that he had a “very favorable” opinion of the Black Lives Matter movement and a “somewhat unfavorable” impression of the Blue Lives Matter countermovement in favor of police, yet “somewhat agreed” that police don’t get the respect they deserve. He said he agrees that there are bad police officers.

“Are there good ones? Yes. So I don’t think it’s right to completely blame the entire organization,” he told the court under questioning from prosecutor Steve Schleicher.

He also said he would be more inclined to believe an officer, all things being equal, over the word of another witness. But he maintained he would be able to set aside any ideas about the inherent honesty of an officer and evaluate each witness on their own.

The second, a man who works in information technology security, marked “strongly agree” on a question about whether he believes police in his community make him feel safe.

His community wasn’t specified — jurors are being drawn from all over Hennepin County.