Ghost Ship Defendant Says He Doesn't 'Blame Anybody' for Deadly Warehouse Fire

Updated 6:30 p.m.

An Alameda County prosecutor asked Ghost Ship master tenant Derick Almena under cross-examination Thursday whether he had told local television station KTVU that “the whole structure of my defense is based on pointing and blaming.”

In response to that pointed question from Alameda County Deputy District Attorney Autrey James, Almena said, "I still don’t want to blame anybody."

Laughter from some court attendees could be heard following that statement.

James asked Almena if he blamed the Ng family, landlords of the Ghost Ship, or a number of individuals who had performed work at the warehouse.

“I’m not blaming anyone,” Almena said, adding that the statement to KTVU had been taken out of context. He said "blame" was not the correct word he had intended to use.

Tony Serra, who represents Almena, said outside court that Almena was being sarcastic when he spoke of "pointing and blaming."

Serra also said outside court that there should be no criminal defendants in the case.

"This is a matter that normally is adjudicated in the civil courts," Serra said. "This is a precedent case because they're going criminal negligence on, you know, an unintended event."

The prosecution finished cross-examination Thursday and the defense rested its case following questioning from Curtis Briggs, who represents defendant Max Harris, and additional follow-up questioning from James.

Almena and Max Harris, who has been described as creative director or second-in-command at the Ghost Ship, each face 36 counts of involuntary manslaughter following the deaths of 35 concert-goers and one tenant on the night of a Dec. 2, 2016, electronic music party. They each face up to 39 years in prison.

The prosecution has argued that Almena and Harris illegally converted the warehouse into an unsafe living space stuffed from floor to ceiling with flammable building materials, and that they didn’t install proper safety measures such as sprinklers, fire alarms and well-lit exits.

James questioned Almena about the lease he signed in November 2013 that indicated that no subleasing was allowed in the warehouse. But Almena said that was on paper only.

“I got permission from the landlords on the phone before I even signed the lease," Almena said. "It was very well-known I was going to sublet.”

James listed individuals who had lived at the warehouse and asked, “You were the landlord to these people, right?” He repeatedly asked if any of those tenants signed the lease, to which Almena answered no.

“It was my building. I agree,” Almena said.

Briggs questioned Almena about zoning for the building and showed a document that indicated the warehouse could be used as a residence, with certain conditions, under the code Almena believed he was operating under. James pointed out those modifications would require permits, which Almena did not obtain.

James also asked if unlicensed contractor and former friend Rodney Griffin had told Almena the warehouse was dangerous and had referred to it as a “death trap.”

“No. Not to me,” Almena responded.

Griffin had testified otherwise earlier in the trial, however, saying that he had visited the warehouse at Almena's request to evaluate the building before Almena signed the lease. Griffin said during testimony on May 7 that when he visited the warehouse again, six months after the lease was signed, he told Almena the warehouse was “very dangerous” and called it a “death trap.” He said Almena had laughed in response.

James also pointed to a 23-page document that Almena had written following his arrest in June 2017 and asked whether Almena wrote that landlord Eva Ng had told him, within a couple of months after signing the lease, to obtain contracts and permits for construction work in the warehouse. Almena responded that he had been asked to get permits but had declined, and that “early on” — in the immediate months after signing the lease — he had asked the Ngs to obtain the proper permits.

Alameda County Judge Trina Thompson said she expects closing arguments to begin on July 29 and to last three to four days. She said rebuttal witnesses, if any, will be called Monday, and additional motions will be taken up.