Verdict Delivered in Arson Trial Linked to Palisades Fire

Firefighters watch the flames from the Palisades Fire burning a home on January 8, 2025, in Los Angeles. - Apu Gomes/Getty Images

Belinda Foster, NB360

Thu, June 25, 2026 at 6:48 PM EDT

A jury has delivered a verdict in the case of Jonathan Rinderknecht, accused of igniting the deadly Palisades fire in 2025.

The fire resulted in the deaths of twelve people and destroyed thousands of homes and businesses in Los Angeles' Pacific Palisades neighborhood.

The verdict will be announced in court soon.

Rinderknecht has pleaded not guilty to three federal charges: destruction of property by fire, arson affecting interstate commerce property, and setting timber afire.

Over six days, prosecutors presented over 30 witnesses, depicting Rinderknecht, 30, as vengeful and angry, claiming he started a fire that grew into the Palisades Fire.

They argued that Rinderknecht was alone in a clearing on a Palisades hillside in the early hours of New Year's Day 2025 when a fire, named the Lachman Fire, began. Although firefighters quickly extinguished the blaze, an arson investigator testified it smoldered underground until heavy winds reignited it on January 7, turning it into the Palisades Fire.

Prosecutors claimed Rinderknecht was driven by a desire for revenge against society, angered by the wealthy, and frustrated by his inability to find companionship on New Year's Eve.

Passengers who rode with Rinderknecht, who was working as an Uber driver, testified that he ranted against capitalism and was obsessed with Luigi Mangione.

The defense acknowledged Rinderknecht saw flames while at the clearing, known as the Hidden Buddha, that night but stressed he called 911 multiple times, though the calls failed to connect. Defense attorney Steve Haney argued that no one witnessed his client starting a fire, asserting that Rinderknecht was being scapegoated.

Rinderknecht's lawyers presented nine witnesses over about three days, including a consultant and former arson investigator, who stated there wasn't sufficient evidence to prove intent to start a fire, suggesting fireworks were "the most obvious cause" of the blaze.