Jurors in the trial over the deadly January 2025 Palisades Fire told the judge they were “at a standstill,” with both sides saying they were “unwilling to change their opinion.”
The deadlock came after two days of deliberations, with U.S. District Judge Anne Hwang even asking the jury Thursday afternoon if there was anything they could do to help – offering to re-read testimony or give additional instructions.
Arson suspect Jonathan Rinderknecht’s defense attorney Steven Haney requested an Allen charge, a judicial directive often given to a deadlocked jury that encourages further deliberations.
30-year-old Rinderknecht, who was arrested back in October, was charged with three federal counts in connection with the January 2025 Palisades Fire, including destruction of property by fire, arson affecting property used in interstate commerce and setting timber afire.
During the trial, prosecutors alleged that Rinderknecht intentionally set the Lachman Fire on Jan. 1, which sprung up on the popular Skull Rock hiking trail. This fire is said to have smoldered for days before it eventually erupted into the massive Palisades Fire on Jan. 7 that went on to kill 12 people and burned more than 23,000 acres.
“On Jan. 1, 2025, Jonathan Rinderknecht started a fire on a hill in the Pacific Palisades,” prosecutor Danbee C. Kim said in her closing statements. “He was angry all the time. He believed he was enslaved by the wealthy. He didn’t understand why the ‘rich losers’ and the ‘motherf—– at the top’ had it all.”
However, Rinderknecht’s defense attorney moved to dismiss the case, claiming the government had insufficient evidence to convict his client. Haney also argued that multiple witnesses testified the Lachman and Palisades fires were separate incidents.
Though, Judge Hwang rejected Haney’s motion to dismiss after federal prosecutor Mark Williams argued that expert testimony refuted this claim at-length.
In his closing statements, Haney argued that “this case is not about whether fire happened,” adding, “It’s about cause and integrity.”
“You might not like Jonathan at the end of this trial, but that doesn’t mean he’s guilty,” Haney added. “You’re not to convict a man if you don’t like him.”
Surveillance footage, cellphone data and Rinderknecht’s own digital footprint — including ChatGPT searches about whether cigarettes can start a wildfire — placed him at the fire point shortly before the blaze was reported, prosecutors argued. After dropping off his last Uber passenger on New Year’s Eve 2025, he allegedly stayed in the neighborhood, where he had previously lived with an ex-boyfriend.
Yet, Haney defended that Rinderknecht was merely a scapegoat for the tragedy, claiming it was the city who failed to protect the Los Angeles neighborhood from the fire.
