Unanswered questions about Palisades arson suspects and Palisades fire tactics abound

Federal prosecutors this week revealed extensive details about the cause of the Jan. 1 Pacific Palisades fire, which was raging again six days later.

The federal investigation made two main findings:

• It is alleged that 29-year-old Uber driver Jonathan Rinderknecht set a fire after dropping off a passenger in Palisades on the evening of December 31.
• Firefighters thought they had extinguished the blaze, known as the Lachman Fire, on January 1, but in fact it was still smoldering.

Still, there are many unanswered questions that are likely to come into focus in the coming days and weeks. One question is Lindknecht’s alleged motive and how he actually set the fire. The second question is whether firefighters could have done more to prevent the fire that started on January 1 from reigniting on January 7.

“The arsonist sets the fire first, but it’s the fire department’s responsibility to proactively do something,” said arson analyst Ed Nordskog, a former head of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Arson Unit.

Here’s what we know and don’t know:

What evidence did federal authorities provide?

Court documents provide a trove of evidence that prosecutors say shows Rinderknecht was on a hiking trail in the early morning hours of New Year’s Day when the fire broke out. They include:

• Video shows him dropping off passengers in the area and parking the car at the Skull Rock Trailhead.
• Photos and videos on his phone show the first minutes of the Jan. 1 fire.
• A witness brought him to the scene after the fire.
• Phone records show he called 911 after the fire.
• GPS data on his phone showed he was standing in the clearing where the fire broke out when he first called 911.

So what was the motive for setting the fire?

Federal prosecutors deliberately did not list a formal motive. But in news conferences and court documents, they shared some details about his behavior before and shortly after the fire.

• They noted that he listened to a French rap song that they claimed contained themes of despair and pain. The song’s music video shows a trash can on fire.
• Among the evidence collected from Rinderknecht’s digital devices was an image he generated on ChatGPT depicting a burning city.
• While on the phone with 911, Rinderknecht allegedly entered a question on ChatGPT: “If there’s a fire, are you at fault?” [lit] because of your cigarettes,” according to the affidavit.
• Court records provide no evidence that he explicitly planned to set the fire.

Prosecutors plan to present evidence to a grand jury and say more details and charges may be released at that time.

“They haven’t received a grand jury indictment yet, so they can add charges. The indictment is just to arrest him and take him to Los Angeles,” said Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor.

What don’t we know?

Clear motivation is one thing. But the other one is the way he sets the fire.

• Based on testimony from a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent, officials said in court documents that Lindknecht started the fire with an open flame, “possibly a lighter,” igniting combustible materials such as plants or paper.
• His own video showed his car’s glove compartment open, authorities said. Authorities said when they later searched the car, they found a barbecue lighter in the glove compartment. The suspect later told investigators he brought a lighter to the trail that night but couldn’t remember what type it was, court documents said.
• While witnesses to the Jan. 1 fire said they heard fireworks, authorities said they were not the cause. They also don’t believe a cigarette was to blame, given the weather conditions in the area at the time of the fire and its rapid spread.

A helicopter fights a fire on Jan. 8, 2025, near Topanga Village, off Topanga Canyon Road.

(Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times)

How was the response to the fire?

Federal reports say Los Angeles firefighters believe they have extinguished the Jan. 1 blaze. But when high winds hit on January 7, the fires returned and spread to Pacific Palisades.

Some residents criticized fire officials for not extinguishing the initial blaze and why they did not preemptively deploy engines to the area ahead of strong winds forecast for Jan. 7.

ATF Special Agent in Charge Kenny Cooper placed the blame squarely on Rinderknecht.

“The City of Los Angeles fire initially responds and extinguishes it, and then the fire burns deep underground, in roots and structures, and remains active for days. Once catastrophic winds occur, fires need fuel, oxygen and heat,” he said.

“Whoever started this fire should be held fully accountable. I will never blame our brave firefighters when we know how this fire started,” he added.

But some experts say more scrutiny of firefighters’ tactics is needed.

“This affidavit places the blame on the fire department. A committee needs to be formed to investigate why the fire was allowed to be reignited,” Nordskog said.

The ATF gave a modest account of how fire departments fought the Jan. 1 fire. But it did not detail actions the department took or failed to take to ensure the fire was indeed extinguished.

It’s not common for wildfires to reignite days or weeks after being extinguished. A fire expert told The Times in January that more often the fire would reignite while firefighters were still clearing the scene so they could quickly contain it. There are things firefighters can do to prevent this from happening.