LOS ANGELES — A federal judge on Wednesday limited what jurors will hear in the arson case against Jonathan Rinderknecht, accused of sparking the deadly Palisades Fire, setting up a narrower evidence fight before his trial begins.
At a pretrial hearing, U.S. District Judge Anne Hwang ruled that evidence defense attorneys sought to introduce could not be used at trial, including certain depositions involving the Los Angeles Fire Department and a state park ranger. The judge said the material defense attorneys planned to rely on was irrelevant to the charges Rinderknecht is facing and could confuse the jury, according to the court-related reporting.
Rinderknecht, 29, pleaded not guilty to starting what prosecutors describe as a fire on Jan. 1, 2025, that burned undetected deep in root systems before flaring back up a week later. Prosecutors say the Palisades Fire began Jan. 7, 2025, and spread through hillside neighborhoods of Pacific Palisades and Malibu, eventually killing 12 people.
Defense attorneys, led by Steve Haney, argued in court that Rinderknecht is being used as a scapegoat for what they say were failures by the Los Angeles Fire Department in responding to an earlier blaze. Haney said during the hearing that the barred evidence was important to show alleged negligence by the fire department.
Hwang’s ruling barred depositions by members of the fire department and a state park ranger that defense attorneys said would support their theory about what happened during the earlier Jan. 1 blaze. The evidence defense attorneys intended to use included testimony indicating the New Year’s Day 2025 fire was visibly smoldering when first responders left the scene, testimony collected as part of a lawsuit filed by fire victims against the city.
Hwang also excluded prosecutors from introducing AI-generated images of a city burning, images prosecutors said Rinderknecht created a few months before the Palisades Fire. Haney told the court that excluding the ChatGPT images mattered to his client, saying they were “very, very prejudicial” and taken out of context.
Other matters related to the Jan. 1 fire, including the fire department’s initial response and investigation, can still be discussed at trial, the reporting said. Haney said he plans to argue that the government does not have solid evidence linking Rinderknecht to the Jan. 1 fire, and that first responders in the vicinity had heard fireworks where the blaze began.
Prosecutors are expected to present their case that connects Rinderknecht to the fire that later flared into the Palisades Fire, and they outlined their strategy in a pretrial memo filed April 29. The memo included details about what prosecutors say was the defendant’s state of mind the night before the first fire began, including that Rinderknecht was upset that he did not have plans for New Year’s Eve and ranted about being angry at the world.
Hwang’s evidentiary rulings come ahead of a trial scheduled to begin June 8 for the man accused of sparking one of California’s most destructive wildfires in recent years.