▲ Vacant lots remaining more than a year after the Palisades fire
The trial regarding the Palisades arson case, considered one of the worst wildfires in California, has concluded without reaching a verdict.
Reuters reported on June 26 (local time) that the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles declared a mistrial for Jonathan Linderknecht, who was identified as the arson suspect in the Palisades fire.
Linderknecht was indicted in January of last year on charges of causing the Palisades fire.
The charges include destruction of property by arson, arson of commercial property, and arson of public forest land. If convicted on all three counts, he could face a maximum sentence of 45 years in prison.
He has pleaded not guilty to all charges and has suggested that he was made a scapegoat for the fire department's failure to respond effectively.
Although the trial lasted for three weeks, the jury was unable to reach a verdict as they remained deadlocked with 10 members voting for acquittal and two for conviction.
In the United States, a unanimous jury decision is required to reach a final verdict on guilt or innocence.
Prosecutors argued that Linderknecht, who worked as an Uber driver, intentionally set the fire on a hiking trail on January 1 of last year out of anger toward the wealthy and society as a whole. They claimed that while the fire was initially extinguished, embers reignited six days later, leading to the massive Palisades wildfire.
Last year's Palisades fire destroyed 7,000 homes and caused property damage amounting to $150 billion (approximately 230 trillion won).
Steve Haney, the defense attorney for Linderknecht, emphasized that there is no physical evidence linking the defendant to the arson and noted that he had urgently called 911 immediately after the fire started.
He also argued that the large-scale fire that began on the 7th could have been caused by fireworks.
Following the declaration of a mistrial, the prosecution announced that it would seek a retrial.
The retrial is scheduled to take place on October 19 of this year.
"The 10-to-2 split is a message from the jury that the prosecution does not have sufficient evidence to prove the case," said Haney. "We will absolutely not engage in any plea bargaining. The defendant did not cause (the Palisades fire)."
(Photo: AP, Yonhap News)
※
Copying, redistribution, and unauthorized use in AI training are strictly prohibited.