Jury to return Friday for further instruction after reaching a standstill in Palisades Fire arson trial

By Jack Hannah, Nick Watt, CNN

Los Angeles (CNN) — Jurors in the federal trial of Palisades Fire suspect Jonathan Rinderknecht were told to return Friday morning for the court’s response after the jury said they were at a standstill and unable to reach a unanimous verdict.

The jury sent a note Thursday indicating they reached a verdict, and then shortly after sent another note that read “We have people on both sides, dead set, unwavering to change their opinion, we are at standstill.” The note brought a flurry of debate from prosecutors and the defense on how to proceed, with both sides agreeing they needed more time to research.

Prosecutors called more than 30 witnesses over six days, painting Rinderknecht, 30, as a vengeful and angry person who they said ignited a blaze that later erupted into the Palisades Fire, which claimed the lives of a dozen people and scorched thousands of homes and businesses in the Pacific Palisades neighborhood in Los Angeles.

With the jury at a standstill after two days of deliberations, prosecutors suggested they could give more arguments while the defense team said they wanted the jury to be sent back for more deliberation.

Both the prosecutors and defense attorneys agreed to send a note asking if the jurors could agree unanimously on each of the three federal charges, which Rinderknecht has pleaded not guilty to: Destruction of property by means of fire, arson affecting property used in interstate commerce and timber set afire.

The jury responded with a note saying, “We cannot reach a unanimous verdict on any of the three charges.” The word “cannot” is underlined in the note, US District Judge Anne Hwang said in court.

Prosecutors suggested they could give more arguments, and the defense team said they wanted the jury to be sent back for more deliberation.

The jury is at “an impasse,” an attorney from Rinderknecht’s defense team said when discussing with the judge and prosecution how to move forward. “The latest note is a pretty clear indication as to where they are.”

If a jury is deadlocked – also known as a hung jury – it can lead the judge to declare a mistrial, ending the trial without a clear resolution.

The court responded to the jury with another note that said they need additional time, and they would “respond to your note when you return” Friday at 9 a.m. PT.

Prosecutors called more than 30 witnesses over six days, painting Rinderknecht, 30, as a vengeful and angry person who they said ignited a blaze that later erupted into the Palisades Fire.

The Palisades Fire claimed the lives of a dozen people and scorched thousands of homes and businesses in the Pacific Palisades neighborhood in Los Angeles.

After court on Thursday, defense attorney Steve Haney told reporters Rinderknecht is feeling “a lot of anxiety,” but “he’s hanging in there.” Prosecutors did not speak to reporters after court.

Prosecutors argued Rinderknecht was alone in a clearing on a Palisades hillside in the early hours of New Year’s Day 2025 when a fire, dubbed the Lachman Fire, broke out. Though firefighters suppressed the blaze soon after, an arson investigator testified the fire smoldered underground before heavy winds caused it to flare again on January 7, becoming the Palisades Fire.

Prosecutors contended Rinderknecht was motivated by his desire to seek revenge against society at large, and that he was angry at the wealthy and his inability to find companionship on New Year’s Eve.

Passengers driven by Rinderknecht – he was working as an Uber driver – testified he ranted about capitalism and was fixated by Luigi Mangione.

The defense acknowledged Rinderknecht saw flames while he was at the clearing – known as the Hidden Buddha – that night but emphasized he called 911 multiple times, though the calls could not immediately connect. Defense attorney Haney argued no one saw his client light a fire, and he contended Rinderknecht had been made a scapegoat.

Rinderknecht’s attorneys called nine witnesses over about three days, including a consultant and former arson investigator who said there was not enough evidence to illustrate a serious intent to start a fire – and that fireworks were “the most obvious cause” of the blaze.

Testimony by other eyewitnesses was used to corroborate defense claims that New Year’s revelers were setting off fireworks in the area that night.

This story has been updated with additional information.

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