Court proceedings started with a surprise Tuesday morning in the re-trial of the man charged in connection with a small brush fire that authorities said was fanned by strong winds days later to become the deadly January 2025 Palisades Fire on the Los Angeles County coast.
In a moment out of a TV courtroom drama, the defense team told the judge in the federal trial of Jonathan Rinderknecht, 30, that on Monday afternoon they received information about a man identified as a retired CalFire agent who has been looking into the Palisades Fire as a private insurance investigator. That man contacted defense attorneys to say he had evidence of fireworks going off in the area and has been in contact with a witness, attorney Steve Haney told the court.
Defense attorneys interviewed the man Monday night, Haney said, and moved to add him as a trial witness. Prosecutors objected, saying they needed time to respond to the new information.
The judge ordered the defense to provide more information by midday. A decision about whether the man will be admitted as a witness had not been made early Tuesday afternoon.
Attorneys for the defense and prosecution are, according to rules of discovery, informed about evidence and witnesses prior to a trial so both sides can prepare their cases and cross-examine witnesses. There may be mid-trial exceptions for exculpatory evidence — information that would tend to absolve a person of guilt or present reasonable doubt.
Defense attorneys have claimed that the smaller fire called the Lachman Fire could have been started by New Year’s Eve fireworks. Haney has said there was insufficient evidence to prove the Lachman Fire was intentionally set and far from conclusive proof that embers reignited in the intense winds a week later.
As the retrial of the suspected arsonist behind the Palisades Fires, federal agents and ATF experts testified how the 2025 wildfire was ignited by underground embers. Eric Leonard reports for the NBC4 News at 4 p.m. on Monday, Nov. 9, 2026.
Defense attorneys have long argued, including during the first trial, that there were witnesses who reported seeing and hearing fireworks around midnight Jan. 1, 2025. Prosecutors have insisted there was not evidence of fireworks starting the Lachman Fire.
After the defense addressed the court Tuesday morning, witness testimony resumed.
The jury in Rinderknecht’s first trial deadlocked 10-2 in favor of an acquittal. Prosecutors immediately announced he would be retried.
Rinderknecht pleaded not guilty to a revised indictment that accuses him of igniting the Lachman Fire, the first of the two fires in Pacific Palisades. Authorities said the Lachman Fire exploded into the Palisades Fire six days after it ignited when powerful Santa Ana winds swept into Southern California on Jan. 7, 2025.
Firefighters initially thought the Lachman Fire had been put out, but it smoldered underground before the windstorm.
The redefined counts separate the arson allegation from the Lachman Fire on Jan. 1 from the devastating Palisades Fire, which burned 23,400 acres and resulted in 12 deaths and the destruction of more than 6,800 structures.
In the first trial in June, the two fires were characterized as a single event. U.S. District Judge Anne Hwang has ruled that there be no reference to the first trial during the retrial.
Federal prosecutors said they believe Rinderknecht intentionally ignited the Lachman Fire around midnight on New Year’s 2025 along a hiking trail in the Palisades highlands neighborhood because he was frustrated with his place in society and harbored particular anger at wealthy people. They described him as a man consumed by anger and loneliness.
Rinderknecht was working as a ride-share driver on the night of the Lachman Fire and had dropped someone off in the Palisades area, prosecutors said. That passenger testified Tuesday that Rinderknecht was venting to her throughout the ride.
Rinderknecht previously lived in the community, but moved out after a relationship with the person he was living with ended, prosecutors said.
Haney told reporters after a pretrial hearing in October that he expected the retrial to include some new defense evidence, but declined to provide detail.