In Closing Arguments, Ghost Ship Defense Attorneys Say Arson Was Cause of Deadly Blaze

Updated 6:40 p.m.

Defense attorneys representing two men each charged with 36 counts of involuntary manslaughter in the deadly 2016 Oakland Ghost Ship warehouse fire wrapped up their closing arguments Tuesday.

The prosecution, in their closing arguments Monday, said that the actions of master tenant Derick Almena and Max Harris, who has been described as creative director or second-in-command of the Ghost Ship, amounted to criminal negligence. The prosecution argued they converted the warehouse into an unsafe living space with no concern for fire safety, violating nine fire codes including not installing sprinklers and other safety measures. The prosecution on Monday also said Almena had violated the terms of the lease almost immediately by allowing people to live there.

Rebuttal from the prosecution is expected Wednesday morning. The jury will begin deliberations afterward.

Read about closing arguments for each defendant below.

Closing Arguments on Behalf of Derick Almena

Tony Serra, who represents Almena, argued Tuesday that arson was the cause of the blaze that killed 35 concert-goers and one tenant the night of an electronic music party on Dec. 2, 2016.

He pointed back to testimony from Sharon Evans who said she overheard a group of men in dark clothing boasting about the fire and how quickly it had spread. He also pointed to testimony from former tenant Darold Leite, who testified he heard an argument, bottles breaking and seven to eight men who left in a hurry. Serra also brought up other testimony by individuals who say they heard an argument the night of the blaze.

Serra also argued that Oakland fire personnel had perjured themselves during testimony. That included Maria Sabatini, an Oakland fire investigator who said she had not entered the Ghost Ship following an alleged arson fire outside the warehouse on Sept. 26, 2014. The testimony contradicts that of five others who said that Sabatini had entered the warehouse to inspect it then.

“The fire department has misled, misstated in some instances, in some instance lied and perjured themselves,” Serra said.

“Why would they perjure themselves?” Serra asked. He said it was because they knew people were living in the warehouse and it was their duty to red tag it if they found something wrong.

“If they admit they did nothing, Oakland would be liable,” Serra said. He called it a “conspiracy to protect Oakland,” and he said Almena was on the stand to create a scapegoat so civil liability could be deflected.

Serra argued that personnel from the Oakland Fire and Police departments, as well as from Child Protective Services, had been through the Ghost Ship dozens of times and never cited it. That gave Almena the impression that he was doing nothing wrong, Serra argued, adding that since officials gave the impression that nothing was wrong he could not have been acting in a reckless manner or with any disregard for life.

Serra also conceded there were violations to the fire code, but those did not amount to criminal negligence.

He said also reiterated that a number of former tenants testified they felt the building was safe and that it wasn’t a “death trap” or “tinderbox.”

Serra admitted his client had lied to police on a number of occasions about people living in the warehouse, but Serra argued that it was at the instruction of the landlords. He said landlord Eva Ng was responsible for obtaining permits for changes to the premises, and that’s why she instructed him to lie – to protect her and her brother Kai Ng’s interests.

Serra ended his closing arguments by putting up a large photo of Almena, his wife Micah Allison and their three children.

“Do you think he (Almena) would risk his children?” Serra asked. Was he reckless and indifferent? Absolutely not.”

Closing Arguments on Behalf of Max Harris

Defense attorney Curtis Briggs, who represents Max Harris, wrapped up his closing arguments Tuesday, arguing there is enough reasonable doubt to find his client not guilty in the deadly 2016 Oakland warehouse fire.

The prosecution concluded its closing arguments Monday, arguing the defendants were criminally negligent in violating nine different fire codes, including not installing safety measures like sprinklers and fire alarms and holding unpermitted events like the one on Dec 2. The prosecution on Monday also said Almena had violated the terms of the lease almost immediately by allowing people to live there.

But Briggs pointed to the courtroom where the trial has been taking place since its preliminary rounds began in early April.

“There were no fire sprinklers inside (the warehouse). There are no fire extinguishers in here. Convict Max anyway,” Briggs told the jury. “There are no illuminated exit signs in this courtroom. There was one in the warehouse. Convict Max anyway.”

He also said that some of the fire codes that the prosecution argued were broken were actually the responsibility of the owners to implement.

Briggs argued Harris did not live in the Ghost Ship when the lease was signed, or when Almena began allowing people to live there. He also said Harris wasn’t there when a side fire door was installed or a set of stairs toward the front of the warehouse was built, both without the required permits.

Briggs laid out a list of people, saying they weren’t being convicted, including landlords Kai and Eva Ng, Ben Cannon, who did electrical work at the warehouse, and Jon Hrabko, who Briggs said organized the Dec. 2 event.

“They did not ask you to convict Kai or Eva Ng,” Briggs said, addressing the jury.

“They asked you to convict Max,” Briggs repeated after each person listed.

He pointed to a number of fire and police officials who had been to the warehouse a number of times and had never flagged the building as a hazard.

He argued that Harris had no managerial role in the warehouse and noted the testimony of at least seven individuals who said as much.

“Max cleaned toilets, swept floors, did the dishes. Convict him,” Briggs said.

The defense has argued that the cause of the blaze, which was never determined by fire investigators, was an act of arson, and that the defendants could not have done anything to prevent it.

Briggs returned to the arson theory Tuesday, saying that at least seven witnesses had testified to its possibility, including: a woman who testified she heard nine to 14 men boasting about the fire getting out of hand quickly, a former tenant who heard an argument and bottles breaking before the fire began, and testimony from a couple of others who also said they heard an argument the night of the fire.

Briggs reminded the jury of their instructions, which say that if previous testimony regarding arson raises a reasonable doubt as to the defendants’ guilt, then they must find the defendants not guilty.

Briggs asked why no fire investigator, including staff from the Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms, Tobacco and Explosives, had asked about any suspicious people the night of the fire. He also asked why fire investigators hadn’t swabbed the scene after the fire for accelerants.

“Don’t you think you deserve that before you check the box 'guilty?' ” Briggs asked the jury.

“They were so sure they had the cause ... electrical,” Briggs said. "They didn’t test anything else.”

Earlier in the trial, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent Barbara Maxwell testified that investigators didn't test debris for the presence of accelerants because they already expected to find flammable substances such as gasoline in the recreational vehicles parked inside the warehouse and used as studios, and paint thinner belonging to artist tenants.

On Tuesday, Briggs also said at least seven witnesses testified they considered the Ghost Ship safe. But he did return to the testimony of Rodney Griffin, a former friend of Almena's who called the warehouse a "death trap." Briggs argued those statements were made before Harris began living at the Ghost Ship.

“I wish someone would have told Max there was a problem, because he would have done something about it,” Briggs said.