Zing Open Zing
World

Federal Judge Declares Mistrial in Palisades Fire Arson Case After Jury Deadlocks

27 June 2026 · Source balance: Centre

A federal judge declared a mistrial Friday in the arson trial of Jonathan Rinderknecht, a 30-year-old former Uber driver accused of starting a brush fire that ignited the deadly 2025 Palisades Fire. The jury deadlocked ten to two in favor of acquittal after deliberating for over 13 hours across two days. Prosecutors say Rinderknecht started the Lachman Fire on January 1st, 2025, which smoldered underground for six days before reigniting in high winds to become the Palisades Fire that killed 12 people and destroyed nearly 7,000 homes. The defense argued fireworks more likely caused the initial fire and questioned the prosecution's evidence. A new trial is scheduled for October 19th. Prosecutors stated they fully intend to retry the case, while the defense called the jury split an overwhelming message that the government failed.

Key facts

  • Judge Anne Hwang declared a mistrial Friday after jury deadlocked 10-2 in favor of acquittal
  • The Palisades Fire killed 12 people and destroyed approximately 7,000 structures in January 2025
  • Prosecutors say Rinderknecht started the Lachman Fire on January 1, 2025, which smoldered for six days underground
  • The trial lasted 2.5 weeks with 8 days of testimony from investigators, experts and witnesses
  • New trial scheduled for October 19, 2026; Rinderknecht remains in federal custody
  • Prosecutors presented digital location data, ChatGPT search history, and lighter evidence; defense argued fireworks and lack of direct evidence

How different outlets framed it

Right-leaning coverage: Right-leaning outlets like Fox News and Courthouse News characterize the mistrial as a significant setback for prosecutors, emphasizing the ten-to-two jury split as a strong statement against the government's case. Some right-leaning coverage highlights defense arguments that investigators lacked direct physical evidence and focused on circumstantial digital evidence.

Limits of this briefing

Coverage is primarily from mainstream broadcast and national news outlets. Limited perspectives from local California legal experts or victim advocacy groups are present in available reporting. The case involves ongoing legal proceedings with complex evidentiary questions not fully resolved by this mistrial.

Sources

More stories

See all latest stories