57 Then those who had seized Jesus led him to Caiaphas the high priest, where the scribes and the elders had gathered. 58 And Peter was following him at a distance, as far as the courtyard of the high priest, and going inside he sat with the guards to see the end. 59 Now the chief priests and the whole Council were seeking false testimony against Jesus that they might put him to death, 60 but they found none, though many false witnesses came forward. At last two came forward 61 and said, “This man said, ‘I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to rebuild it in three days.’” 62 And the high priest stood up and said, “Have you no answer to make? What is it that these men testify against you?” 63 But Jesus remained silent. And the high priest said to him, “I adjure you by the living God, tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.” 64 Jesus said to him, “You have said so. But I tell you, from now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.” 65 Then the high priest tore his robes and said, “He has uttered blasphemy. What further witnesses do we need? You have now heard his blasphemy. 66 What is your judgement?” They answered, “He deserves death.” 67 Then they spat in his face and struck him. And some slapped him, 68 saying, “Prophesy to us, you Christ! Who is it that struck you?”
The trial of Jesus was a twofold one, ecclesiastical, before the Jewish authorities, and political, before Pilate (and Herod). Before the religious rulers, the charge against Him was that of blasphemy, because He claimed to be Messiah. Before Pilate, however, the charge was not blasphemy, but treason against Caesar. There is a significance in this. The Jews desired Jesus' death on the grounds of His blasphemy. But they had no power as a subject nation to sentence anyone to death themselves, and they realised it would be useless to prefer a charge of blasphemy against Him in the eyes of Rome, for Rome would be indifferent to such a consideration. It was not an indictable offence. So it had to be another charge. And they cunningly turned His claim to be King into a treasonable claim against the Emperor (hence Pilate's question 'Art Thou the king of the Jews?'). Even a cursory reading of these verses makes it plain that the trial, as such, was a shameful farce, from beginning to end, without a vestige of either justice or legality. It was hurried through in indecent haste; it was unlawfully convened; there was no attempt at hearing evidence; the accused was not allowed to state a case. Everything that could have been wrong about it was wrong. But then, it needed to have been thus if they were to secure a verdict against the Sinless One. The only way for them to do so was to pervert justice. It was an Innocent One who was condemned to die. And this is echoed in the later apostolic teaching: Christ suffered, the Just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God.