Mistrial Declared in Palisades Fire Arson Case

A mistrial was declared on Friday, June 20, 2025, in the federal trial of Jonathan Rinderknecht, who was accused of starting the fire that became the Palisades Fire. The jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict on three federal arson charges. A new trial has been scheduled for October 19, 2025, and prosecutors have announced their intention to retry the case.

Trial Outcome

The jury deliberated for approximately 13 hours over two days before informing the court that they were deadlocked on all counts. The final vote was 10 to 2 in favor of acquittal.

One juror stated that the majority of jurors were "unwilling to change their opinion."

Judge Anne Hwang declared a mistrial, citing a "manifest necessity" after declining a prosecution request for further deliberation, stating that continued deliberation risked coercion.

Charges and Background

Rinderknecht, 30, a former Uber driver, pleaded not guilty to three federal charges:

• Destruction of property by means of fire
• Arson affecting property used in interstate commerce
• Timber set afire

If convicted, he faces a potential sentence of up to 45 years in prison.

The Fire

The Palisades Fire began on January 7, 2025, and burned 23,448 acres in the Pacific Palisades neighborhood of Los Angeles and Malibu. The fire destroyed approximately 6,800 structures, killed 12 people, and caused billions of dollars in damages.

Prosecutors allege the fire originated from a smaller blaze, known as the Lachman Fire, that was ignited on January 1, 2025, and smoldered underground before re-emerging fueled by Santa Ana winds.

Prosecution Case

Over six days of testimony, prosecutors called more than 30 witnesses and presented evidence including:

• Security video and cellphone data allegedly placing Rinderknecht at the ignition site (a hiking trail known as Skull Rock or Hidden Buddha) on January 1, 2025
• A green Bic grill lighter found in his rental car
• His ChatGPT queries about whether cigarettes can start wildfires and questions about fire responsibility
• Search history related to wealth inequality and references to Luigi Mangione, the accused UnitedHealthcare CEO shooter
• Testimony from a passenger who said Rinderknecht drove erratically on New Year's Eve and ranted about capitalism and being "pissed off at the world"

Prosecutors argued that Rinderknecht was motivated by anger at the wealthy, loneliness, and a desire for revenge against society, and that he intentionally set the Lachman Fire using a barbecue lighter.

Defense Case

The defense called nine witnesses over about three days and argued:

• No witness saw Rinderknecht light a fire
• No accelerants were found at the scene
• Rinderknecht made multiple 911 calls after the fire started, which the defense said indicated he did not intend to start it
• Fireworks, not arson, were the most likely cause of the initial blaze, supported by testimony from a former arson investigator and eyewitnesses who reported hearing explosions and seeing fireworks in the area
• Investigators did not secure the crime scene promptly, potentially compromising evidence
• A Palisades resident testified to seeing four men near the ignition site on January 1

Defense attorney Steve Haney stated that his client was being scapegoated and that the evidence was insufficient for a conviction.

Statements from Parties

• Judge Anne Hwang: Ordered Rinderknecht to remain in custody and set a retrial for October 19, 2025.
• First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli: Stated that the evidence is strong and his office intends to retry the case and obtain guilty verdicts on all counts.
• Defense Attorney Steve Haney: Said the 10-2 vote indicated his client's innocence and that the government's case was not strong.
• Rinderknecht's Father, Joel Rinderknecht: Expressed disappointment that his son remains in custody, stating, "We know, from day one, our son is innocent. It feels like the government is just taking him as a scapegoat."

Juror Comments

Juror No. 4, who voted not guilty, cited lack of cellphone data placing Rinderknecht in the area, gaps in surveillance footage, and questions about the Los Angeles Fire Department's handling of the initial fire. She stated there were "a lot of holes" in the government's case.

An alternate juror said defense witnesses "really helped sway me."