A juror in the case of alleged Palisades firebug Jonathan Rinderknecht didn’t mince her words when describing the case brought against him, calling the whole thing “Bulls-t.”

Juror #4, a woman named Bryana from Lompoc, California, told The California Post that she felt the government didn’t present a convincing enough case and wasted jurors’ time.

“It’s disappointing because of how much money and time they put into the same thing. I don’t know … but like, yeah, bullsh*t,” she said.

“I really felt like, ‘What are we doing here?’ a lot of times. And at first my thoughts were like, “Oh, even if he’s guilty, there’s not enough…” You know like you feel like that? You see it on TV all the time —murderers get off, and I mean, that’s how my brain went.

“You’re supposed to be presenting this case to me to convict that man, and I felt like, ‘No, that doesn’t make sense. Like, what?’ Like, you’re making me feel like he’s more and more innocent with each fact.”

Jurors were called to a Los Angeles federal courtroom Friday where the foreman was asked a series of questions about the group’s inability to come to a conclusion in the trial.

Those questions included — Is it your considered opinion jurors can’t agree? Anything the court can do to assist? Will they reach verdict if sent back?

The foreman answered no to all of the questions, and a mistrial was declared. Two of the jurors believed Rinderknecht was guilty and 10 of them said not guilty. Rinderknecht showed little emotion when as the decision was announced. He will remain in custody.

LA’s top federal prosecutor, Bill Essayli, was quick to declare he will retry Rinderknecht.

“The evidence is strong that Jonathan Rinderknecht is responsible for igniting the fire on January 1, 2025, which eventually became the Palisades fire. We fully intend to retry this case before a new jury and obtain guilty verdicts on all charged counts,” he posted on X.

Bryana said she felt like Rinderknecht wasn’t a loner as prosecutors had painted him, but just a “regular, troubled person.”

“I went in knowing I felt like with the evidence he was not guilty,” she said. “So I did, I looked at that because I know what it’s like. I know what it’s like to — I just have an awesome family that supports me, and no one would know I was so, you know, outside.”

She also complimented Steve Haney, Rinderknecht’s attorney, for his “bougie” dresswear and said he laid out the case eloquently for his client.

“He pointed out great points to like make you understand. Yeah, I think he’s awesome,” she said.