By Jack Hannah, Nick Watt, Dakin Andone

Los Angeles (CNN) — Throughout his federal arson trial, Jonathan Rinderknecht was painted as a vengeful person whose disdain for the wealthy, anger at the world and obsession with fire fueled him to ignite a blaze that later became the deadly Palisades Fire.

At trial, prosecutors said Rinderknecht had asked ChatGPT to generate images of fire and at one point queried, “Why am I so angry all the time?” His Uber passengers testified Rinderknecht was “enraged,” “irritable” and reckless, describing conversations in which they said he ranted about his hatred for President Donald Trump, was fixated by Luigi Mangione and lamented the “crumbling” of humanity.

But that was all irrelevant, defense attorney Steve Haney told jurors in his opening statement.

The case was not about Rinderknecht’s social views or whether he was likable. The question they had to answer was “much narrower,” Haney said.

“Can the government prove he set that fire on January 1, 2025?”

Evidently, it could not.

On Friday, a judge declared a mistrial in Rinderknecht’s arson trial after a deadlocked jury said it could not come to a unanimous verdict on any of the three charges against him. The vote was 10 people for not guilty and two for guilty, the foreperson said in court.

First Assistant US Attorney Bill Essayli said federal prosecutors plan to retry the case, saying the “evidence is strong.”

In contrast, Haney said the 10 to 2 jury split was an “overwhelming message” that the prosecution’s case was not strong. “(Rinderknecht’s) spirits are good and he was encouraged” by the jury’s skepticism of the charges, he said.

Outside court, a juror named Syrena said she was one of the not guilty votes. “There’s just not enough proof,” she said of the case. “A lot of holes.”

The judge scheduled the retrial for October 19 and ordered Rinderknecht to remain behind bars until then.

The deadlock ends without resolution a trial that focused on the cause of the historically destructive wildfire that devastated swaths of Los Angeles, killed a dozen people and scorched thousands of homes and businesses.

Prosecutors accused Rinderknecht, 30, of starting a precursor fire that erupted into the Palisades Fire days later because of strong winds. Rinderknecht had pleaded not guilty to destruction of property by means of fire, arson affecting property used in interstate commerce and timber set afire. He faced up to 45 years in prison if convicted.

Throughout the trial, Rinderknecht’s defense hammered home two themes that served as a throughline for their case.

First, his client did not start the fire – not the initial Lachman Fire, nor the Palisades Fire – and that it was ignited by New Year’s fireworks.

And second, when his client saw the fire on a hillside clearing that night, he repeatedly called 911 to report it.

Taken together, the defense’s arguments succeeded – at least for now – in preventing a conviction for Rinderknecht, the only person charged in connection with starting the fire.

Defense pushed back on fire’s cause

Prosecutors contended Rinderknecht started the Lachman Fire, which was quickly suppressed by firefighters. But they argued it was a so-called holdover fire, which continued to smolder before high winds fueled its remnants into the Palisades Fire.

At trial, prosecutors worked to place Rinderknecht at the site of the fire’s origin, a hillside clearing known as the Hidden Buddha, around the time the precursor fire started shortly after midnight on New Year’s Day 2025.

They showed surveillance footage that captured a vehicle in the area they said was rented by Rinderknecht, as well as cell phone data that placed his phone in close proximity to where they argued the fire ignited.

In its opening statement, the prosecution said investigators ultimately found a Bic grill lighter in the glove compartment of Rinderknecht’s rental car.

Investigators determined the cause of the fire was the willful ignition of combustible materials with an open flame, ATF Special Agent Derek Hill testified. Other investigators for the ATF said they probed the fire’s origins and ruled out various causes, including lightning, power lines, cigarettes and, notably, fireworks.

Fireworks would have been incapable of starting the fire under the conditions that night, and anyone in the area would have seen or heard fireworks going off, ATF Explosives Enforcement Officer Kevin Miner testified.

Two other government witnesses who reviewed thousands of hours of surveillance footage testified no fireworks were observed near the fire’s origins – nor were they seen in a 360-degree video Rinderknecht captured on his phone just before the fire.

Though Rinderknecht himself had told investigators he saw “zero fireworks,” his defense attorney challenged investigators’ conclusion that fireworks could not be the cause.

Under cross-examination by Haney, government witness ATF Special Agent Michael Montevidoni acknowledged nearby residents had previously reported problems with people setting fireworks off in the Hidden Budda area.

Montevidoni also acknowledged his team initially believed fireworks could have been a cause, and some of the cameras that captured surveillance footage reviewed by investigators were not of the highest quality.

In its own case, the defense called residents from the area who testified to hearing explosions and seeing flashes of light in the area around New Year’s that night. A security guard also testified that he heard fireworks around midnight and saw a group of teenage boys coming down from the trailhead near Hidden Buddha. The guard relayed this information to the ATF, he said.

Defense attorneys also called a wildfire consultant, Tom Guzman, who testified that he had concluded fireworks were the most likely cause of the Lachman Fire. There was a lack of physical evidence, he said, to support the ATF’s conclusion about the fire’s cause. He noted fireworks are a recurring cause of wildland fires, particularly around the July 4 and New Year’s holidays.

Another defense witness, arson investigator Edward Nordskog, testified it was “ridiculous” to suggest ground fireworks couldn’t start a fire.

Defense emphasized Rinderknecht’s 911 calls

The defense conceded Rinderknecht’s presence at the Hidden Buddha location around the time the Lachman Fire started – and acknowledged that he saw the flames.

But his attorneys emphasized that he called 911 more than a dozen times.

While the initial calls failed to connect due to poor reception, Rinderknecht did connect with an operator and reported the fire. Officials were responding by that time, having received multiple calls about the blaze, the operator told him, according to evidence presented in court.

Prosecutors cast Rinderknecht’s actions as typical of arsonists: ATF Special Agent Matthew Beals testified arson research has shown perpetrators “do call 911” and return to the scene of their crime.

They also pointed to a screen recording Rinderknecht captured on his phone, showing it dialing 911 and then asking ChatGPT if one can be held at fault for a fire if it was lit by one’s cigarette. Prosecutors argued this was an effort by the defendant to create a record of his attempt to assist with the suppression of the fire – and evidence of an innocent explanation for its cause.

The defense, however, insisted Rinderknecht’s behavior was simply that of a concerned citizen.

Nordskog said he was unfamiliar with an arson case where the perpetrator placed multiple calls to 911 to report a fire and then remained on the scene – testifying that behavior was normal for an innocent citizen reporting a fire. Guzman similarly said the defendant’s actions were typical of what he’s seen 911 callers do while panicking.

This story has been updated with additional information.

CNN’s Eric Levenson contributed to this report.

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.