Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Crime

ChatGPT, iPhone History Found for Uber Driver Charged With Starting California's Palisades Fire (bbc.com) 50

"A 29-year-old man has been arrested on suspicion of starting the Pacific Palisades fire in Los Angeles that killed 12 people and destroyed more than 6,000 homes in January," reports the BBC.

"Evidence collected from Jonathan Rinderknecht's digital devices included an image he generated on ChatGPT depicting a burning city, justice department officials said." Mr Rinderknecht had been living and working in California, and moved to Florida shortly after the fire, according to authorities. The initial blaze Mr Rinderknecht allegedly started on New Year's Day was called the Lachman fire. Although it was quickly suppressed by firefighters, it continued to smoulder underground in the root structure of dense vegetation, according to investigators, before it flared up again above ground in a windstorm [nearly a week later]... He lit it with an open flame after he completed a ride as an Uber driver on New Year's Eve, according to the indictment.

Two passengers rode with Mr Rinderknecht earlier on New Year's Eve. One passenger told investigators he remembered the driver had appeared agitated and angry. Officials said they had used his phone data to pinpoint his location when the fire initially started on 1 January, but when they pressed him on details he allegedly lied to investigators, claiming he was near the bottom of the trail... The phone also showed that he repeatedly called 911 just after midnight on New Year's day, but could not get through because of patchy mobile reception on the trailhead. There was a screen recording of him trying to call emergency services and at one point being connected with a dispatcher. Mr Rinderknecht also asked ChatGPT: "Are you at fault if a fire is lift [sic] because of your cigarettes?"

Investigators said the suspect wanted to "preserve evidence of himself trying to assist in the suppression of the fire". "He wanted to create evidence regarding a more innocent explanation for the cause of the fire," the indictment said... In July 2024, five months before he allegedly set the fire, Mr Rinderknecht asked ChatGPT to create an image of a "dystopian painting" that included a burning forest and a crowd of people running away from a fire, according to investigators.

The announcement from officials suggests they retrieved data about Rinderknecht's iPhone. It says after walking up the trailer Rinderknecht "listened to a rap song — to which he had listened repeatedly in previous days — whose music video included things being lit on fire."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

ChatGPT, iPhone History Found for Uber Driver Charged With Starting California's Palisades Fire

Comments Filter:
    • Was meticulously tracked and readily available to the police? Maybe that's something that should give us all some pause.
      • by gweihir ( 88907 )

        Indeed. But I guess the "tough on crime" idiots will just remain stuck in not seeing the massive threat.

  • Always remember your disclaimer, people!

  • Shouldn't the evidence be presented in trial and evaluated by a judge and jury? Why announce their findings to the public before it's been validated?
    • Well when your cabinet consists of DEI and DUI hires it’s no real surprise. It’s not like the head of the military texted classified bombing information to a journalist. Oh wait, never mind.

    • by skam240 ( 789197 )

      They're letting the public know what's going on with a major investigation of significant public interest just like with other high profile criminals and crimes. This is incredibly normal behavior from both government and the news media.

      • by bsolar ( 1176767 )

        They're letting the public know what's going on with a major investigation of significant public interest just like with other high profile criminals and crimes. This is incredibly normal behavior from both government and the news media.

        While true, it's also potentially risky especially in a high profile case where pretrial coverage can reach a lot of people.

        As example, if for some reason part of the evidence publicly disclosed will be ruled inadmissible for trial, jury selection would be significantly impacted as it might become very problematic to find an unbiased jury.

        • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

          While true, it's also potentially risky especially in a high profile case where pretrial coverage can reach a lot of people.

          As example, if for some reason part of the evidence publicly disclosed will be ruled inadmissible for trial, jury selection would be significantly impacted as it might become very problematic to find an unbiased jury.

          Or it's likely that it's evidence they aren't going to use because it's so circumstantial it's worthless. "We found our suspect, he had ChatGPT and location history puttin

        • by skam240 ( 789197 )

          There's risk there for sure and government does need to be careful with what info is given out. The other side of the coin here though is that our government answers to the people and the people of LA are very eager for progress to be made in this investigation. Does the state not have a responsibility to let the people know about the progress their government has been making on such an important issue to them?

          I know if I lived in LA I'd want updates on the investigation's progress so I'd know if my governm

    • Because if they simply announced they arrested an uber driver for the fire, no one would believe them?

      Also, they are likely proud of their slam-dunk evidence.

      • by BytePusher ( 209961 ) on Saturday October 11, 2025 @04:03PM (#65718902) Homepage
        They could easily say that they have a suspect in custody and that the evidence is sealed. At this point, they're poisoning any possible jury and setting themselves up for a mistrial. Also, the evidence isn't slam dunk:
        1) "driver had appeared agitated and angry" according to passengers
        2) circumstantial evidence that he was near the fire when it started -> he saw the fire and called 911 multiple times to report it.
        3) He asked ChatGPT a question: "Are you at fault if a fire is lift [sic] because of your cigarettes?"
        4) They mention he prompted ChatGPT months earlier to generate an image of a fire, but they don't tell us the prompt.
        5) He listened to a rap song, of which he probably was not watching the music video with the fires

        He may have done it, but this isn't pride in the evidence they have, it's desperation to find someone to blame and likely exonerate the state for not putting out the fire as well. The power distribution system in California is notorious for starting fires. So there's public, political and private financial incentive to find a fall guy. Wildfires are ravaging California, so it's normal to do web searches and talk to LLMs about fires and fire safety. If this guy were as obsessed with fire as they claim, there would be *a lot* more material to report about his obsession.
        • > Also, the evidence isn't slam dunk

          That was my impression too. I don't know who did it or even if someone did but all you listed is clearly circumstantial and the only thing they've got is the story they've made up and that's not in any way evidence of guilt. Any half competent lawyer would show that.

          I'm also amazed at the number of people here who actually seem to think this kind of stuff is evidence of guilt.

  • I am curious why music is mentioned in the article.
    • And did you miss the quote from the summary? "whose music video included things being lit on fire." It could have been jazz, rock even classical. The key is the lyrics. Although I'm not aware of any classical suggesting burning Rome down. Maybe one out there, dunno.
  • That's It?! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by StormReaver ( 59959 ) on Saturday October 11, 2025 @12:45PM (#65718610)

    That's all they have? Even as far as circumstantial evidence goes, that is incredibly weak. Even the GPS location data is very weak. My wife and I used to have tracking software on our phones, and it would frequently show us MILES away from our actual locations.

    The rest is nothing more than guilt by association. I sure hope they have more than that before going to trial, especially if the man is actually guilty.

    I'm sure there are lots of people in the Pallisades area that are unhappy and vent on the Internet. This is incredibly shoddy investigative work.

    • Not just shoddy, they're setting themselves up for a mistrial. How are you going to get a jury in California that hasn't seen the news stories of his presumed guilt?
    • They likely found him by fishing through cellular tower data. He was near the place and time that the fire started and they are now busy creating a case around that. He is likely guilty, but he will not get a fair trial and will be found guilty regardless of the reality of his actions.

  • Of course, he is guilty! He is a Florida Man!

    No further evidence required

    But seriously, the theory is that he was pissed off and flicked a cigarette into some brush, and it caught fire, so he called 911. Firefighters responded and put it out. But unknown to anyone, it continued burning underground... for a week before exploding and burning a chunk of the city.

    It would be an implausible plot for a movie.

    The guy was so freaked out, he asked ChatGPT and ChatGPT narked on him? So it is no longer "delete you

Basic is a high level languish. APL is a high level anguish.

Working...