At first the jury said it had a verdict. Thirty minutes later it said it did not.
That turn came on a Thursday afternoon in the federal trial of Jonathan Rinderknecht, the man accused of setting the fire that became the deadly Palisades Fire. The judge asked whether another instruction or a re-reading of testimony might help. The jury’s written answer was blunt: “There is nothing the court can do to assist the jury in their deliberations… Unfortunately, we cannot reach a unanimous verdict.” The judge declared a mistrial.
Ten jurors thought Rinderknecht was not guilty. Two thought he was.
The case
Rinderknecht was arrested in October 2025 and charged with destruction of property by means of fire. He pleaded not guilty. Prosecutors say he started a fire on January 1, 2025 that grew into the Palisades Fire. Estimates put the damage from that fire at $35 billion to $45 billion, and 12 people died.
The government’s theory leaned on motive. Behavioral analyst Kevin Kelm testified that Rinderknecht’s conduct resembled that of someone driven by “societal revenge.” Kelm also told jurors that Rinderknecht used ChatGPT to make a “dystopian image” of society, with a barrier between the wealthy and everyone else.
In a court filing, prosecutors wrote that he had grown “increasingly angry with his life and society at large,” and that in the weeks and hours before the fire he “fixated on Luigi Mangione,” who is charged in the killing of the UnitedHealthcare CEO in New York on December 4, 2024. They said Rinderknecht searched for “free LuigiMangione,” “lets take down all the billionaires” and “reddit lets kill all the billionaires” on Dec. 12 and 13, 2024. Asked by investigators why someone might commit arson in the Pacific Palisades, prosecutors wrote, he answered that it would come from resentment of the rich.
Mangione’s attorney, Karen Friedman Agnifilo, rejected any link. “Mr. Mangione does not support violent actions and does not condone past or future political violence,” she said in a statement to Fox News Digital, calling the attempts to connect him to unrelated acts “irresponsible, dangerous and prejudicial.”
Both sides respond
United States Attorney Bill Essayli said on X that “the evidence is strong” that Rinderknecht ignited the fire, and that the office “fully intend[s] to retry this case before a new jury.”
Defense attorney Steven Haney read the split the other way. An acquittal would have been better, he said, but the verdict made clear the case “does not have the evidence that it needs.”
A woman who identified herself as juror number four told reporters she saw “no proof.” The government’s holdover theory, that an earlier fire smoldered and later became the Palisades Fire, “just wasn’t working for me,” she said. Retrying the case, in her words, would be a “waste of our American dollars.”
Sources
- Palisades Fire Mistrial Leaves Federal Arson Case In Limbo
- Mistrial declared for Palisades Fire suspect who allegedly fixated on Luigi Mangione
