| SHEEPHERALD! |
|
 |
| the_trial_of_jesus_from_a_legal_standpoint.docx |
The Trial of Jesus from a Legal Standpoint.
Writer: Anonymous.
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
The Romans, led by Pompey, overran Palestine in 63 B.C. and by the time of Christ, the Romans had conquered and occupied Judea. The land of the Jews then became subject to Roman rule; however, the native customs and institutions were allowed to continue so long as they did not contradict the Roman government and its policy. This was the "worldwide" policy of Rome.
The Hebrew Commonwealth was a theocracy in which Jehovah was King and the priests, prophets and people were subjects and servants.
HEBREW JUDICIAL STRUCTURE
The Great Sanhedrin (Supreme Court of Hebrew Law): (71 members):
1. Presiding Officers: (2):
(a) President - Prince (Nasi)
(b) Vice President - Father of the tribunal (ab-beth-din).
2. Chamber of Priests (23)
3. Chamber of Scribes (23)
4. Chamber of Elders (23).
Qualifications:
1. Must have been a Hebrew and a lineal descendant of Hebrew parents.
2. Must have been learned in the law; both written and unwritten.
3. Must have had judicial experience (must have previously filled three offices of gradually increasing dignity, beginning with one of the local courts and passing successively through two magistrates at Jerusalem).
4. Must have been thoroughly proficient in scientific knowledge.
5. Must have been a linguist (accomplished in languages of neighboring nations).
6. Must have been modest, popular, of good appearance and free from haughtiness.
7. Must have been pious, strong and courageous.
Disqualifications:
1. One who had not, or had never had, regular trade, profession (gainful livelihood).
2. Where death penalty involved, an aged man, a childless man or illegitimate men.
3. Gamblers, dice players, bettors on pigeon matches, usurers, and slave dealers.
4. One who dealt in the fruits of the seventh year.
5. One who was interested or concerned in the case.
6. Any relatives of the accused (whatever degree of consanguinity).
7. Anyone who would be benefited by death of the accused.
8. King
In the following scriptures, Jesus was making prophetic reference to the great Sanhedrin:
Matthew 16:21: "From that time forth began Jesus to show unto his disciples, how that He must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day." (Reference to the three chambers of the great Sanhedrin.)
Matthew 20:18: "Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of Man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the scribes, and they shall condemn Him to death." (Another reference to the great Sanhedrin)
Minor Sanhedrins (23 members):
1. Each Hebrew Commonwealth with at least 120 families entitled to one.
2. Establishment had to be sanctioned by the the great Sanhedrin.
3. More in the nature of local governmental bodies (city council / courts).
4. Judges could be elevated to The Great Sanhedrin; therefore, Judges faced same qualifications and disqualifications.
Note: There were two Minor Sanhedrins in Jerusalem; their judges were apparently better qualified, because other Minor Sanhedrins could refer cases to them for decision.
Court of Three (3 members) :
1. Judges were selected by litigants to a case. Each side chose one judge and those two chose a third judge.
Note: There were no one-man courts under Hebrew law.
CHARACTERISTICS OF HEBREW CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE
Organizational Structure:
1. No public prosecutor; witnesses were the prosecutors.
2. In capital cases, witnesses were legal executioners, too.
3. No advocates (lawyers in the modern sense. Judges and disciples performed role of attorney and counselor, in modern terms. Prophets were the sole orators of Hebrew law, but could not appear for the accused.)
Witnesses
1. Competence of witness: almost identical to qualifications of judges.
2. Incompetent witnesses: Gentiles, women, minors (under 13), slaves, idiots and lunatics, deaf mutes, blind men, gamblers, usurers, illiterate or immodest persons, persons convicted of irreligion or immorality, relatives ( by consanguinity or sanguinity), and all persons interested in the case.
Evidence:
1. Must be at least two witnesses, in addition to the prosecuting witness, required to convict.
2. All the witnesses’ testimony had to agree in all essential details.
3. No oath required – NINTH COMMANDMENT: “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.”
4. Witnesses were separated while testifying and had to testify in the presence of the accused.
5. Two sets of questions as to time and place of alleged crime had to be asked and answered.
6. Accused never had to testify against himself.
7. Irrelevant evidence was not admissible:
(a) Hearsay.
(b) Circumstantial.
(c) Written or documentary.
NOTE: False witnesses were punished in the manner prescribed for the crime to which he testified.
UNIQUE ASPECT OF HEBREW LAW:
Antecedent Warning:
A person charged with a crime involving life and death, or even corporal punishment, could not be convicted, unless it was shown by competent testimony that immediately before the commission of the crime, the offender was warned that what he was about to do was a crime, and that a certain penalty was attached thereto. Even then, the offender had to have acknowledged the warning and willingness to bear the consequences of his act.
PROCEDURE: THE HEBREW TRIAL
The Morning Sacrifice: The morning sacrifice was offered at the break of day. It was, apparently, a mixed legal-religious affair, and many leading students of Hebrew law conclude that the morning sacrifice was necessary before the Greta Sanhedrin could legally convene.
Assembling of the Judges:
Very solemn, formal proceeding which took place after the morning sacrifice.
The High Priest sat at the center with the other members in a half-circle to his right or left. He was attired in robes, jewelry, etc., most of which was symbolic.
One clerk transcribed the testimony against the accused and recorded the votes. Another scribe transcribed the testimony in favor of the accused. Some scholars maintain that a third kept a record of everything, as a cross-check.
Preliminary Examination of Witnesses:
Note: Bear in mind that witnesses were the sole accusers.
The Preliminary examination was held first in another room by a committee of the Great Sanhedrin to sift out irrelevant evidence. The witness was then given a long and comprehensive warning about testifying, perjury, etc.
The witness was then asked the precise questions as to time and place of the crime. He was next examined regarding the facts of the crime and the accused connection with it.
After witnesses against the accused were heard, witnesses for the accused (and the accused himself IF HE CHOSE) were heard. If there were any material contradictions, the accused was acquitted, at that point. If the testimony met muster, the witnesses then testified before the full Great Sanhedrin.
Debates and Balloting:
After all the evidence was received, an open discussion was held. Only arguments on accused behalf could be advanced first. Then, a full discussion was had.
The youngest members had to vote first. Each judge stood, cast his vote and explained why he voted as he did.
If the verdict was both instantaneous and unanimous, it worked an ACQUITTAL. (Because one judge is supposed to be the accused lawyer.)*
In the event of conviction:
Sentence could not be pronounced until the next afternoon following. No heavy food (such as meat) and no intoxicants were taken during the rest of the day and night. The judges called upon each other to compare notes to insure that no injustice would be worked.
Second Trial:
In all capital cases, two trials were held. The second trial was held the next day following the first trial (except as prohibited by law – to be discussed later).
The second trial was in the nature of an appeal but was de novo. Any newly discovered evidence was admitted, and judges had to vote again and explain why they voted as they did. However, a judge who voted for acquittal on the first day could not vote for conviction on the second day, or second trial. If he voted for conviction on the first day, he could change his mind and vote for acquittal on the second. If he again voted for conviction, but on substantially different grounds, his vote was rejected.
If the accused were condemned on the second day, the judges reexamined their positions until Sunset, the official time of execution of punishment (the Judges fasted on this second day – the day a fellow Israelite was to be condemned).
There would then be an elaborate procession and a public pronouncement, and if anyone could offer any new evidence in favor of the accused, the Great Sanhedrin went back into session. The accused himself could make offers of excuse – up to five times.
Finally, a mixture of frankincense and myrrh, with vinegar or wine, placed the accused in a state of stupefaction, and he was stoned, strangled, burned or beheaded, according to his crime.
There were two crimes against the state with which we will be concerned in any consideration of the trial before the Great Sanhedrin:
Blasphemy: Two – fold meaning:
1. A verbal renunciation and profane speaking of the name of Jehovah, and/or
2. Failure to give due credit to Jehovah (religious treason).
Sedition: Treason (political) (or breach of allegiance of serious nature).
EXAMINATION OF ARREST AND TRIAL OF JESUS BEFORE THE GREAT SANHEDRIN
The arrest took place on the night of Thursday, April 6, 30 A.D. The Feast of the Passover had been celebrated, probably in Mark’s home, in the Upper Room. Judas left the room and the others went out in the Garden of Gethsemane. Judas appeared, planted a kiss on Jesus, and Jesus was detained by the Roman soldiers.
The arrest was illegal, because:
1. It was effected at night in violation of Hebrew Law. When Peter and John were arrested, they were detained at night and held (presumably for formal arrest the next morning). “And they laid hands on them and put them in hold unto the next day; for it was now eventide.” Acts 4:3
“Judas then, having received a band of men and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons.” (nighttime) John 18:3.
“Then the band and the captain and officers of the Jews took Jesus, and bound him, and led him away to Annas first; for he was father-in-law to Caiaphas, which was the high priest that same year.” John 18:12-13 (Arrest and presentation to the Great Sanhedrin.)
2. The employment of Judas by the Great Sanhedrin, because, in legal parlance, Judas was an accomplice of Jesus (he occupied the seat of honor, next to the Master, at the Passover Feast), and under Hebrew Law, testimony of an accomplice could not be used.
“Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went unto the chief priests, and said unto them, what will ye give me and I will deliver him unto you? And they covenanted with him for thirty pieces of silver. And from that time, he sought opportunity to betray him.” (Matthew 26:14-16)
3. The sole aim of the Great Sanhedrin was not to achieve justice, but to do away with Jesus.
“Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas, And consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him. But they said, Not on the feast day, lest there be an uproar among the people.” (Mat 26:3-5)
PRELIMINARY HEARING
The scriptures are not clear as to whether this was conducted by Annas or Caiaphas; however, it is immaterial. It was illegal either way, because:
1. Nighttime.
2. Before a single judge.
3. Private preliminary examination not permitted by Hebrew Law.
THE INDICTMENT
The indictment (formal charge) was illegal, because:
1. Two-fold, vague and indefinite (sedition and blasphemy).
The entire criminal procedure of the Mosaic Code rested upon 4 rules:
(a) Certainty in the indictment.
(b) Publicity in the discussion.
(c) Full freedom granted to the accused.
(d) Assurance against all dangers or errors of testimony.
2. One charge (blasphemy) was made by Caiaphas, one of the judges, which was prohibited by Hebrew Law (judges supposed to be unbiased and independent). The Sanhedrin did not and could not legally originate charges; it only investigated those brought before it.
Mark 14:56-64:
For many bare false witness against him, but their witness agreed not together. (Mar 14:56 KJV) (This acquitted Jesus on the sedition charge.)
And there arose certain, and bare false witness against him, saying, (Mar 14:57 KJV)
We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands. (Mar 14:58 KJV)
But neither so did their witness agree together. (Mar 14:59 KJV)(Another reason for acquittal.)
And the high priest stood up in the midst, and asked Jesus, saying, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee? (Mar 14:60 KJV)
But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? (Mar 14:61 KJV)
And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. (Mar 14:62 KJV)
Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses? (Mar 14:63 KJV)
Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death. (Mar 14:64 KJV)(charge changed to blasphemy and was unanimous.)
The proceedings of the Great Sanhedrin were illegal, because they were conducted at night.
Under Hebrew Law, the minor Sanhedrins could hold court only after the morning sacrifice and until noon; the Great Sanhedrin could go on until evening; however, trials of capital cases had to be suspended at night and could be tried only in daytime.
The proceedings of the Great Sanhedrin were illegal, because the court convened before the offering of morning sacrifice.
The importance of this point lies with the fact that the Hebrew nation was theocratic; the judges were supposed to seek the will of Jehovah. The religious ceremony should have preceded the legal work of the Great Sanhedrin.
The proceedings of the Great Sanhedrin were illegal, because they were conducted on the day preceding a Jewish Sabbath: also on the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread and the eve of the Passover.
No Hebrew court could lawfully meet on the Sabbath or a feast day, or on a day preceding a Sabbath or a feast day. A Jewish day began at sunset and lasted until the following sunset. Jesus was arrested, tried and executed on 14th Nisan (Jewish calendar) or Thursday night and Friday morning (April 6 and 7, 30 A.D., our calendar) and the next day, Saturday, was the Jewish Sabbath.
Also, the Feast of Unleavened Bread had begun and the Passover had begun.
Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the Passover. (John 18:28 KJV)
See also Luke 22:1
The proceedings were illegal, because they were concluded in one day.
A trial resulting in acquittal could be concluded in one day; however, in the event of conviction, at least 2 days were required. Before condemnation could be finally decreed, a night had to pass during which time the judges could sleep, fast, meditate, and pray. The Gospels show clearly that both trials by the Great Sanhedrin were held in one day – within a span of 6 hours.
The proceedings were illegal, because Jesus was condemned upon his uncorroborated confession.
Jesus should have been acquitted and released when the testimony on the charge of sedition proved contradictory; however, Caiaphas was not content. His question “Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” was illegal, because it called for a confession of guilt to be made on the basis of a conviction.
Moreover, Jesus was not given the Antecedent Warning.
The condemnation was illegal, because the verdict of the Great Sanhedrin was unanimous.
Although a strange and unique rule, Hebrew Law provided that a unanimous verdict worked an acquittal. The logic behind this was that the judges were the Defendant’s only defenders, since there were no lawyers or advocates as we know them. If the prisoner had not even one friend on the court, this amounted to conspiracy or even mob violence to the Jewish mind.
Mark 14:64: “…And they all condemned him to be guilty of death.”
Moreover, apparently the full council was present:
“And they led Jesus away to the high priest: and with him were assembled all the chief priests and the elders and the scribes. And Peter followed him afar off, even into the palace of the high priest: and he sat with the servants, and warmed himself at the fire. And the chief priests and all the council sought for witness against Jesus to put him to death; and found none.
(Mar 14:53-55 KJV)
The proceedings were illegal, because:
1. The sentence of condemnation was pronounced in a place forbidden by law.
Hebrew law required the trial of all capital cases to be held in the Hall of Hewn Stones, an apartment of the National Temple at Jerusalem.
Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the Passover. (Joh 18:28 KJV)
This hall of judgment was the Praetorium of Pilate and not the Hall of Hewn Stones.
2. The High Priest rent his clothes.
Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses? (Mar 14:63 KJV)
Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death. (Mar 14:64 KJV)
And he that is the high priest among his brethren, upon whose head the anointing oil was poured, and that is consecrated to put on the garments, shall not uncover his head, nor rend his clothes;
(Lev 21:10 KJV)
And Moses said unto Aaron, and unto Eleazar and unto Ithamar, his sons, Uncover not your heads, neither rend your clothes; lest ye die, and lest wrath come upon all the people… (Lev 10:6 KJV)
3. The balloting was irregular.
In a capital case, the judges were supposed to vote in inverse order of seniority. The scriptures suggest that the judges voted en masse – perhaps by acclamation. In Matthew 26:65, the High Priest said: “He hath spoken blasphemy.” This statement was made prior to the voting, and expressed the ranking member’s sentiments; while the law required the voting to be done starting with the junior member of the court and working up in seniority so that the older members’ votes would not unduly influence that of the younger members.
The end.
Writer: Anonymous.
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
The Romans, led by Pompey, overran Palestine in 63 B.C. and by the time of Christ, the Romans had conquered and occupied Judea. The land of the Jews then became subject to Roman rule; however, the native customs and institutions were allowed to continue so long as they did not contradict the Roman government and its policy. This was the "worldwide" policy of Rome.
The Hebrew Commonwealth was a theocracy in which Jehovah was King and the priests, prophets and people were subjects and servants.
HEBREW JUDICIAL STRUCTURE
The Great Sanhedrin (Supreme Court of Hebrew Law): (71 members):
1. Presiding Officers: (2):
(a) President - Prince (Nasi)
(b) Vice President - Father of the tribunal (ab-beth-din).
2. Chamber of Priests (23)
3. Chamber of Scribes (23)
4. Chamber of Elders (23).
Qualifications:
1. Must have been a Hebrew and a lineal descendant of Hebrew parents.
2. Must have been learned in the law; both written and unwritten.
3. Must have had judicial experience (must have previously filled three offices of gradually increasing dignity, beginning with one of the local courts and passing successively through two magistrates at Jerusalem).
4. Must have been thoroughly proficient in scientific knowledge.
5. Must have been a linguist (accomplished in languages of neighboring nations).
6. Must have been modest, popular, of good appearance and free from haughtiness.
7. Must have been pious, strong and courageous.
Disqualifications:
1. One who had not, or had never had, regular trade, profession (gainful livelihood).
2. Where death penalty involved, an aged man, a childless man or illegitimate men.
3. Gamblers, dice players, bettors on pigeon matches, usurers, and slave dealers.
4. One who dealt in the fruits of the seventh year.
5. One who was interested or concerned in the case.
6. Any relatives of the accused (whatever degree of consanguinity).
7. Anyone who would be benefited by death of the accused.
8. King
In the following scriptures, Jesus was making prophetic reference to the great Sanhedrin:
Matthew 16:21: "From that time forth began Jesus to show unto his disciples, how that He must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day." (Reference to the three chambers of the great Sanhedrin.)
Matthew 20:18: "Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of Man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the scribes, and they shall condemn Him to death." (Another reference to the great Sanhedrin)
Minor Sanhedrins (23 members):
1. Each Hebrew Commonwealth with at least 120 families entitled to one.
2. Establishment had to be sanctioned by the the great Sanhedrin.
3. More in the nature of local governmental bodies (city council / courts).
4. Judges could be elevated to The Great Sanhedrin; therefore, Judges faced same qualifications and disqualifications.
Note: There were two Minor Sanhedrins in Jerusalem; their judges were apparently better qualified, because other Minor Sanhedrins could refer cases to them for decision.
Court of Three (3 members) :
1. Judges were selected by litigants to a case. Each side chose one judge and those two chose a third judge.
Note: There were no one-man courts under Hebrew law.
CHARACTERISTICS OF HEBREW CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE
Organizational Structure:
1. No public prosecutor; witnesses were the prosecutors.
2. In capital cases, witnesses were legal executioners, too.
3. No advocates (lawyers in the modern sense. Judges and disciples performed role of attorney and counselor, in modern terms. Prophets were the sole orators of Hebrew law, but could not appear for the accused.)
Witnesses
1. Competence of witness: almost identical to qualifications of judges.
2. Incompetent witnesses: Gentiles, women, minors (under 13), slaves, idiots and lunatics, deaf mutes, blind men, gamblers, usurers, illiterate or immodest persons, persons convicted of irreligion or immorality, relatives ( by consanguinity or sanguinity), and all persons interested in the case.
Evidence:
1. Must be at least two witnesses, in addition to the prosecuting witness, required to convict.
2. All the witnesses’ testimony had to agree in all essential details.
3. No oath required – NINTH COMMANDMENT: “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.”
4. Witnesses were separated while testifying and had to testify in the presence of the accused.
5. Two sets of questions as to time and place of alleged crime had to be asked and answered.
6. Accused never had to testify against himself.
7. Irrelevant evidence was not admissible:
(a) Hearsay.
(b) Circumstantial.
(c) Written or documentary.
NOTE: False witnesses were punished in the manner prescribed for the crime to which he testified.
UNIQUE ASPECT OF HEBREW LAW:
Antecedent Warning:
A person charged with a crime involving life and death, or even corporal punishment, could not be convicted, unless it was shown by competent testimony that immediately before the commission of the crime, the offender was warned that what he was about to do was a crime, and that a certain penalty was attached thereto. Even then, the offender had to have acknowledged the warning and willingness to bear the consequences of his act.
PROCEDURE: THE HEBREW TRIAL
The Morning Sacrifice: The morning sacrifice was offered at the break of day. It was, apparently, a mixed legal-religious affair, and many leading students of Hebrew law conclude that the morning sacrifice was necessary before the Greta Sanhedrin could legally convene.
Assembling of the Judges:
Very solemn, formal proceeding which took place after the morning sacrifice.
The High Priest sat at the center with the other members in a half-circle to his right or left. He was attired in robes, jewelry, etc., most of which was symbolic.
One clerk transcribed the testimony against the accused and recorded the votes. Another scribe transcribed the testimony in favor of the accused. Some scholars maintain that a third kept a record of everything, as a cross-check.
Preliminary Examination of Witnesses:
Note: Bear in mind that witnesses were the sole accusers.
The Preliminary examination was held first in another room by a committee of the Great Sanhedrin to sift out irrelevant evidence. The witness was then given a long and comprehensive warning about testifying, perjury, etc.
The witness was then asked the precise questions as to time and place of the crime. He was next examined regarding the facts of the crime and the accused connection with it.
After witnesses against the accused were heard, witnesses for the accused (and the accused himself IF HE CHOSE) were heard. If there were any material contradictions, the accused was acquitted, at that point. If the testimony met muster, the witnesses then testified before the full Great Sanhedrin.
Debates and Balloting:
After all the evidence was received, an open discussion was held. Only arguments on accused behalf could be advanced first. Then, a full discussion was had.
The youngest members had to vote first. Each judge stood, cast his vote and explained why he voted as he did.
If the verdict was both instantaneous and unanimous, it worked an ACQUITTAL. (Because one judge is supposed to be the accused lawyer.)*
In the event of conviction:
Sentence could not be pronounced until the next afternoon following. No heavy food (such as meat) and no intoxicants were taken during the rest of the day and night. The judges called upon each other to compare notes to insure that no injustice would be worked.
Second Trial:
In all capital cases, two trials were held. The second trial was held the next day following the first trial (except as prohibited by law – to be discussed later).
The second trial was in the nature of an appeal but was de novo. Any newly discovered evidence was admitted, and judges had to vote again and explain why they voted as they did. However, a judge who voted for acquittal on the first day could not vote for conviction on the second day, or second trial. If he voted for conviction on the first day, he could change his mind and vote for acquittal on the second. If he again voted for conviction, but on substantially different grounds, his vote was rejected.
If the accused were condemned on the second day, the judges reexamined their positions until Sunset, the official time of execution of punishment (the Judges fasted on this second day – the day a fellow Israelite was to be condemned).
There would then be an elaborate procession and a public pronouncement, and if anyone could offer any new evidence in favor of the accused, the Great Sanhedrin went back into session. The accused himself could make offers of excuse – up to five times.
Finally, a mixture of frankincense and myrrh, with vinegar or wine, placed the accused in a state of stupefaction, and he was stoned, strangled, burned or beheaded, according to his crime.
There were two crimes against the state with which we will be concerned in any consideration of the trial before the Great Sanhedrin:
Blasphemy: Two – fold meaning:
1. A verbal renunciation and profane speaking of the name of Jehovah, and/or
2. Failure to give due credit to Jehovah (religious treason).
Sedition: Treason (political) (or breach of allegiance of serious nature).
EXAMINATION OF ARREST AND TRIAL OF JESUS BEFORE THE GREAT SANHEDRIN
The arrest took place on the night of Thursday, April 6, 30 A.D. The Feast of the Passover had been celebrated, probably in Mark’s home, in the Upper Room. Judas left the room and the others went out in the Garden of Gethsemane. Judas appeared, planted a kiss on Jesus, and Jesus was detained by the Roman soldiers.
The arrest was illegal, because:
1. It was effected at night in violation of Hebrew Law. When Peter and John were arrested, they were detained at night and held (presumably for formal arrest the next morning). “And they laid hands on them and put them in hold unto the next day; for it was now eventide.” Acts 4:3
“Judas then, having received a band of men and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons.” (nighttime) John 18:3.
“Then the band and the captain and officers of the Jews took Jesus, and bound him, and led him away to Annas first; for he was father-in-law to Caiaphas, which was the high priest that same year.” John 18:12-13 (Arrest and presentation to the Great Sanhedrin.)
2. The employment of Judas by the Great Sanhedrin, because, in legal parlance, Judas was an accomplice of Jesus (he occupied the seat of honor, next to the Master, at the Passover Feast), and under Hebrew Law, testimony of an accomplice could not be used.
“Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went unto the chief priests, and said unto them, what will ye give me and I will deliver him unto you? And they covenanted with him for thirty pieces of silver. And from that time, he sought opportunity to betray him.” (Matthew 26:14-16)
3. The sole aim of the Great Sanhedrin was not to achieve justice, but to do away with Jesus.
“Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas, And consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him. But they said, Not on the feast day, lest there be an uproar among the people.” (Mat 26:3-5)
PRELIMINARY HEARING
The scriptures are not clear as to whether this was conducted by Annas or Caiaphas; however, it is immaterial. It was illegal either way, because:
1. Nighttime.
2. Before a single judge.
3. Private preliminary examination not permitted by Hebrew Law.
THE INDICTMENT
The indictment (formal charge) was illegal, because:
1. Two-fold, vague and indefinite (sedition and blasphemy).
The entire criminal procedure of the Mosaic Code rested upon 4 rules:
(a) Certainty in the indictment.
(b) Publicity in the discussion.
(c) Full freedom granted to the accused.
(d) Assurance against all dangers or errors of testimony.
2. One charge (blasphemy) was made by Caiaphas, one of the judges, which was prohibited by Hebrew Law (judges supposed to be unbiased and independent). The Sanhedrin did not and could not legally originate charges; it only investigated those brought before it.
Mark 14:56-64:
For many bare false witness against him, but their witness agreed not together. (Mar 14:56 KJV) (This acquitted Jesus on the sedition charge.)
And there arose certain, and bare false witness against him, saying, (Mar 14:57 KJV)
We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands. (Mar 14:58 KJV)
But neither so did their witness agree together. (Mar 14:59 KJV)(Another reason for acquittal.)
And the high priest stood up in the midst, and asked Jesus, saying, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee? (Mar 14:60 KJV)
But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? (Mar 14:61 KJV)
And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. (Mar 14:62 KJV)
Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses? (Mar 14:63 KJV)
Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death. (Mar 14:64 KJV)(charge changed to blasphemy and was unanimous.)
The proceedings of the Great Sanhedrin were illegal, because they were conducted at night.
Under Hebrew Law, the minor Sanhedrins could hold court only after the morning sacrifice and until noon; the Great Sanhedrin could go on until evening; however, trials of capital cases had to be suspended at night and could be tried only in daytime.
The proceedings of the Great Sanhedrin were illegal, because the court convened before the offering of morning sacrifice.
The importance of this point lies with the fact that the Hebrew nation was theocratic; the judges were supposed to seek the will of Jehovah. The religious ceremony should have preceded the legal work of the Great Sanhedrin.
The proceedings of the Great Sanhedrin were illegal, because they were conducted on the day preceding a Jewish Sabbath: also on the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread and the eve of the Passover.
No Hebrew court could lawfully meet on the Sabbath or a feast day, or on a day preceding a Sabbath or a feast day. A Jewish day began at sunset and lasted until the following sunset. Jesus was arrested, tried and executed on 14th Nisan (Jewish calendar) or Thursday night and Friday morning (April 6 and 7, 30 A.D., our calendar) and the next day, Saturday, was the Jewish Sabbath.
Also, the Feast of Unleavened Bread had begun and the Passover had begun.
Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the Passover. (John 18:28 KJV)
See also Luke 22:1
The proceedings were illegal, because they were concluded in one day.
A trial resulting in acquittal could be concluded in one day; however, in the event of conviction, at least 2 days were required. Before condemnation could be finally decreed, a night had to pass during which time the judges could sleep, fast, meditate, and pray. The Gospels show clearly that both trials by the Great Sanhedrin were held in one day – within a span of 6 hours.
The proceedings were illegal, because Jesus was condemned upon his uncorroborated confession.
Jesus should have been acquitted and released when the testimony on the charge of sedition proved contradictory; however, Caiaphas was not content. His question “Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” was illegal, because it called for a confession of guilt to be made on the basis of a conviction.
Moreover, Jesus was not given the Antecedent Warning.
The condemnation was illegal, because the verdict of the Great Sanhedrin was unanimous.
Although a strange and unique rule, Hebrew Law provided that a unanimous verdict worked an acquittal. The logic behind this was that the judges were the Defendant’s only defenders, since there were no lawyers or advocates as we know them. If the prisoner had not even one friend on the court, this amounted to conspiracy or even mob violence to the Jewish mind.
Mark 14:64: “…And they all condemned him to be guilty of death.”
Moreover, apparently the full council was present:
“And they led Jesus away to the high priest: and with him were assembled all the chief priests and the elders and the scribes. And Peter followed him afar off, even into the palace of the high priest: and he sat with the servants, and warmed himself at the fire. And the chief priests and all the council sought for witness against Jesus to put him to death; and found none.
(Mar 14:53-55 KJV)
The proceedings were illegal, because:
1. The sentence of condemnation was pronounced in a place forbidden by law.
Hebrew law required the trial of all capital cases to be held in the Hall of Hewn Stones, an apartment of the National Temple at Jerusalem.
Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the Passover. (Joh 18:28 KJV)
This hall of judgment was the Praetorium of Pilate and not the Hall of Hewn Stones.
2. The High Priest rent his clothes.
Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses? (Mar 14:63 KJV)
Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death. (Mar 14:64 KJV)
And he that is the high priest among his brethren, upon whose head the anointing oil was poured, and that is consecrated to put on the garments, shall not uncover his head, nor rend his clothes;
(Lev 21:10 KJV)
And Moses said unto Aaron, and unto Eleazar and unto Ithamar, his sons, Uncover not your heads, neither rend your clothes; lest ye die, and lest wrath come upon all the people… (Lev 10:6 KJV)
3. The balloting was irregular.
In a capital case, the judges were supposed to vote in inverse order of seniority. The scriptures suggest that the judges voted en masse – perhaps by acclamation. In Matthew 26:65, the High Priest said: “He hath spoken blasphemy.” This statement was made prior to the voting, and expressed the ranking member’s sentiments; while the law required the voting to be done starting with the junior member of the court and working up in seniority so that the older members’ votes would not unduly influence that of the younger members.
The end.
 |