The Unlawful Trials of Jesus
- Scott Bullerwell
- 19 hours ago
- 15 min read
You might know the name Barry Neufeld. A former Chilliwack, B.C. school trustee, this past February, 2026, he was ordered by the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal to pay $750,000.00 for violating the Human Rights Code. A new benchmark! The complaint was brought to the tribunal in 2018 by the Chilliwack Teachers' Association and B.C. Teachers' Federation (BCTF) on behalf of their members who identify as LGBTQ. His sins? He made statements that were considered hateful and discriminatory, gave interviews ... and even expressed his view on Facebook. In the court’s decision, listen to a slice of their “thinking” - if you can call it that:
“If a person elects not to ‘believe’ that gender identity is separate from sex assigned at birth, then they do not ‘believe’ in transpeople. This is a form of existential denial.”
I have never had much confidence in Canada’s Human Rights Commissions.1 Yes, I distrust them. They are often solicited by people with frivolous claims ... those looking for a huge financial benefit for imagined hurt feelings ... and activists with an ideological bent, especially towards Christians. They remain an unacceptable threat to free speech. In my view, these are quasi-judicial kangaroo courts – generating substandard adjudicative, defective, biased decisions ... operating outside the purview of Canada’s traditional legal system ... providing reduced legal protections for the defendant. As I see it, they “imitate” a fair trial.2
These courts are ‘extra-judicial;’ in other words, this is a parallel court system ... but without the legal safeguards found in a traditional court of law.
These courts, in the name of faster and cheaper litigation, are more “flexible,” so we are told (that should tell us something right there). What they do not tell you is that the checks and balances of the Canadian court system, like adhering to strict rules of evidence — are missing. In a criminal case there is a ‘higher burden of proof’ (beyond a reasonable doubt). Not here! In fact, hearsay is permitted if it is considered reliable – even though it is not admissible in a proper court of law.
A complainant receives free legal aid from the Commission; defendants need to fund their own defense – AND if the defendant should win, they get no awarded costs.
To stream-line the process, a Commission will tell a defendant that a lawyer is “not necessary.” Meanwhile, the one filing the complaint enjoys free counsel ... and even gets paid for out-of-pocket expenses. Do you get the impression the defendant is maybe being “set-up”?
In most jurisdictions, the decision of the Tribunal cannot be appealed to a higher court.
In the name of “access,” it costs nothing to bring a complaint ... and state resources, like a lawyer, are applied to the prosecution, tilting the process in favour of the complainant (e.g., Think LGBTQ+++ vs Christians and you pretty much have it figured out).
Interestingly, in June of 2024, because of a complaint of discrimination by the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI), representing more than 110 National Human Rights institutions, Canada’s own Human Rights Commission was put under “Special Review” for violating human rights? Amazing! This puts Canada - the land of “elbows-up” and “not serviceable” military equipment (54% Navy; 55% Air Force; 46% Army vehicles) - alongside the likes of Russia, Iraq, and Venezuela. Systemic bias and discrimination had apparently been an open secret in the ‘Commission’ for years. I am shocked, right? No – I am not.
Miscarriages of justice is nothing new. You might remember that Jesus himself faced a biased court ... and not surprisingly, had His legal rights violated – several times, in fact! With the Easter season now in full swing, a review of some of the illegal proceedings against Jesus is rather enlightening!
Having been “ratted-out” by Judas for 30 pieces of silver (Matthew 26:15), Jesus was quickly arrested (26:50) and led before those who would appear to be deciding His future. Gethsemane now lies behind Him and Christ is now about to meet the judge. Imagine! The one who could proclaim justice in this world because of His inherent authority ... comes into contact with ‘judges’ who will pass judgment on Him by virtue of the authority they had received from God. Amazing! That they flagrantly abused it, will be demonstrated. Nevertheless, we should not forget that their authority had its source in God.
John tells us (18:13) that after being securely bound, Jesus was taken first to the palace of Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas for a preliminary hearing. Annas (A.D. 6 - A.D. 15) is now an ex-High Priest but he was still a very powerful man, often presiding over the Sanhedrin. In fact, he is the power behind Caiaphas.
Jesus faced six trials. Three religious (Jewish) hearings
where He was found guilty and three civil (Roman)
hearings where He was found innocent.
Using Hebrew law at the time of Christ, the arrest of Jesus was illegal on at least four counts:
(1) In Hebrew law, a judge was not to sit alone and question an accused person - or to sit in judgment on his legal rights - either by day or by night.
John 18:13-28 says that Jesus is questioned alone, in a preliminary meeting, at night, following his arrest - in Annas’ private home. Annas was looking for evidence to condemn Jesus.
The Mishnah is the oldest authoritative post-biblical collection and codification of Jewish oral laws. In Pirkei Avot 4.10 (“Ethics of the Fathers”), a tractate within the Mishnah, it is strongly advised against judging alone: "Be not a sole judge, for there is no sole judge but One [God]." (Also see Tosafot Sanhedrin 5a s. v. Kigone Ana.)3
One-judge courts were not allowed. The hallmark of a Beit Din proceeding (rabbinic court responsible for interpreting and applying Jewish law) is the presence of three Dayanim (rabbinic judges) or their largest: seventy-one judges.
Only a court of 23 judges (called a Sanhedrin Katana) or the 71-member Sanhedrin had the authority to judge a capital case and impose the death penalty.
“Cases of monetary law are judged by a court of three judges, and cases of capital law are judged by a court of twenty-three judges.” (Mishnah, Sanhedrin 4.1)
Next, Matthew tells us (26:57), that Jesus was brought to the High Priest Joseph Caiaphas (the Sadducean oppressor; 18 CE – 36/37 CE) and the Sanhedrin, which was the Jewish supreme council and court.4 The law allowed investigations only at daylight – but the Sanhedrin proceeded to hold their trial before sunrise.
“Those who had arrested Jesus took him to Caiaphas, the high priest, where the teachers of the law and the elders had assembled” (26:57). This happened in the darkness of the morning. Matthew 27:1 then sequentially notes “When it was morning ...”
Talmudic law: “In cases of capital law, the court judges during the daytime, and concludes the deliberations and issues the ruling only in the daytime.” (Mishnah, Sanhedrin 4:1l; 88b.5)
In Jewish legal tradition, court sessions were heavily tied to the sacrifices, with most cases, including capital cases happening only after the morning daily sacrifice was offered – the 3rd hour of the day (9:00 am). The first order of priestly business each day was the morning sacrifice. Think of the morning sacrifice as the official start of the daily business in the Temple and it included the convening of the high court. So even though Jesus’ sunrise trial before the Sanhedrin was not a night-time trial, by the thinnest of margins, it was nevertheless illegal given that the morning sacrifices had not yet been offered.
The Jewish leaders were among the best-educated; the Sanhedrin were among the most eminent; the Governor was among the most politically successful. But ethically, morally, and spiritually they were all rotten to the core.
(2) Matthew (26) and Mark (14) both indicate that the trial before the Sanhedrin occurred at night and it was an inflexible rule of Hebrew law that arrests and trials at night leading to capital punishment (death) were illegal.
Mark 14:53-54 says, “They took Jesus to the high priest, and all the chief priests, the elders and the teachers of the law came together. Peter followed him at a distance, right into the courtyard of the high priest. There he sat with the guards and warmed himself at the fire.” Jesus was arrested around 1:00 a.m. and taken to Caiaphas for questioning before dawn, around 3:00 a.m.
“In non-capital cases they hold trial during the daytime and the verdict may be reached during the night; in capital cases they hold the trial during the daytime and the verdict must also be reached during the daytime. In non-capital cases the verdict, whether of acquittal or of conviction, may be reached the same day; in capital cases a verdict of acquittal may be reached on the same day, but a verdict of conviction not until the following day.” (Mishnah, Sanhedrin 4.1)
Jesus was arrested in the early morning, tried by both Jewish (Annas, Caiaphas, Sanhedrin) and Roman authorities (Pilate, Herod) ... convicted ... sentenced ... and crucified on the same day – Good Friday; all within between 12 – 15 hours! Now ... THAT ... is a fast capital death decision.
Keeping track of all that happened in the trial of Jesus and the illegal proceedings against Him, is enormously difficult. But when you finally get there, you encounter the perseverance of Jesus in fulfilling God’s divine redemptive plan. Quite amazing!
But it gets worse! Capital crimes could not be concluded on the eve of a Sabbath or festival (holiday) ... (a) in case writing (work) had to be done by the scribes recording the proceedings; (b) because the court was required to immediately begin the execution process and capital punishment is forbidden on Shabbat; and (c) the court can’t issue the verdict after Shabbat, on Saturday evening, because capital punishments are carried out only in the daytime. All four Gospels (Matthew 27:62, Mark 15:42, Luke 23:54, John 19:14, 31, 42) precisely identify the time of His trial, condemnation, and crucifixion as “Preparation Day” (the 6th day of the week) - what we commonly call Good Friday.
The Feast of Unleavened Bread was a 7-day festival, beginning with the night of Passover. Jesus, you will recall, was arrested in Gethsemane hours after celebrating it with his disciples. If the Jews had followed the law, they would have had to wait 9 days before trying him because the 7 days feast would end on the eve of a sabbath, requiring a further delay.
(3) In Hebrew law it was illegal (Lev. 19:16-18) to use a traitor, an accused, or a convicted criminal to bring about an arrest or testify as a witness for the state against an associate or accomplice. Today we call it, “turning state's evidence.”
It was OK for "Easy Eddie" O'Hare, the mobster, to testify against Al Capone for tax evasion;
It was OK for "Sammy, The Bull" Gravano, the mob hit man, to testify against John Gotti for racketeering, and get immunity;
It was OK for John Dean of Watergate fame, to testify against President Richard Nixon.
But, in Jewish law it was illegal ... so when the Sanhedrin conspired to have Jesus killed by paying off Judas ... and when false witnesses came forward and accused the Nazarene of blasphemy (Matt. 26:60) — it was a capital crime under Jewish law. In fact, any witness who was found to be lying would receive the punishment the accused was supposed to receive (Deuteronomy 19:16-19):
“Know, moreover, that capital cases are not like non-capital cases: in non-capital cases a man may pay money and so make atonement, but in capital cases the witness is answerable for the blood of him [that is wrongfully condemned] and the blood of his descendants [that should have been born to him] to the end of the world.” (Mishnah, Sanhedrin 4.5.1)
Pardon the expression, but things were not kosher!
(4) The arrest of Jesus was illegal, because it was not the result of a legal mandate. No where do we read that a legal court had ever issued a warrant to have Jesus “picked-up” and read His Miranda Rights.
I am old enough to remember Dragnet and Adam-12. You are likely old enough to remember Law and Order: Special Victims Unit, NYPD Blue, and Hill Street Blues. They all popularized the reading of someone’s “Miranda Rights”:
You have the right to remain silent;
Anything you do or say may be used against you in a court of law;
You have the right to consult an attorney;
If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you …
Well, there was no sincere and cautioned attempt when it came to apprehending this “dangerous” citizen of Israel – Jesus. It seems clear that this was an executive act ... an effort to pronounce a pre-determined sentence without legal justification. It was a travesty of justice.
The decision to kill Jesus was decided long before the perjurers blundered their way through the night to an unlawful gathering. “... some stood up and gave this false testimony ... yet even then their testimony did not agree” (Mark 14:57, 59).
The entire misuse … abuse … mistreatment … exploitation …violation of the Jewish legal system to catch one supposed ‘blasphemer’ is laughable, were it not so lamentable. In fact, the Sanhedrin had already determined beforehand that they were going to condemn Christ to death, even if His innocence could be proven. Let me illustrate:
1. John 9 (v. 22) A blind man is healed. When the Pharisees investigated the healing of the blind man, they called for his parents. “How is it that he can see?” Notice v. 22. “For already the Jews had decided” that anyone who acknowledged that Jesus was the Messiah, would be put out of the synagogue. So, clearly the Sanhedrin had already met because (1) only the Sanhedrin had the power to excommunicate, and (2) clearly the question of what to do with Jesus had already been discussed ... and determined.
2. John 11 Jesus receives news that Lazarus was sick … and had died two days later. Jesus goes to Bethany and Lazarus is resurrected. This miracle of Jesus was reported to the Pharisees – who call a second council meeting of the Sanhedrin (11:47). It is a set-up! “So, from that day on they plotted to take His life” (11:53)
Did the Sanhedrin summon the accused into their council? No.
Did the Sanhedrin call witnesses? No.
Did the Sanhedrin make an investigation of His doctrines or miracles? No.
No, No, NO! From now on, the expediency of putting Christ to death will no longer be discussed. The matter is settled!
3. Matthew 26:3-5 About 20-25 days following the miracle of Jesus, we read:
“Then the chief priests and the elders of the people assembled in the palace of the high priest, whose name was Caiaphas, and they plotted to arrest Jesus in some sly way and kill him.”
So, the question of the sentence of Christ is no longer debated. His death had already been determined at the resurrection of Lazarus. Only the time and manner of His death needed to be executed. The doom of Jesus was sealed long before His trial. The trial is only a pretense - a mockery of justice.
Caiphas, the high priest who presided over Jesus’ trial was a Sadducee. In fact, the Sanhedrin itself was dominated by Sadducees – Sadducees who not only dismissed messianic expectations, but rejected the possibility of a human possessing divine qualities. In their view, it should be priests who rule over the people – not kings. So, when Caiaphas directly charged Jesus: "I adjure you by the living God, that you tell us whether you are the Christ, the Son of God" (Matthew 26:63), Jesus answered "I am" (Mark 14:62). This is called forced self-incrimination! Well, Caiaphas goes ballistic, “He has spoken blasphemy” — pronouncing Jesus to be worthy of death. Of course, (a) Jesus had spoken the truth, and (b) a charge of blasphemy is defined as profaning/defiling the name of God — but saying the name “Yahweh” is a required element of blasphemy (Mishnah, Sanhedrin 7.5), something Jesus does not do. When it comes to Jesus, Caiaphas apparently cannot see reason – just red.
What Caiaphas, the theologian did not know, “Tell us whether you are the Christ, the Son of God,” (Matthew 26:63), Peter, the lay guy had already declared “You are the Christ/Messiah, the son of the living God”
(Matthew 16:16). Thanks Peter!
Now, with Jesus’ response, it is no longer a mystery. Jesus puts it on the table. He is declaring both His messiahship and His divinity ... and Caiphas, the strongman of an entrenched religious system, has made his choice; his opportunity is lost ... and there is no record in Scripture that he ever changed his mind - to his own eternal detriment.
We should not forget that Jesus had two court trials -- not one. The first trial was before the Jewish authorities, three distinct meetings: Annas (Jn. 18:12-14, 19-23), in Caiphas’ home (Matt. 26:57-68; Luke 22:54 – not legally authorized location), and then the Sanhedrin (Luke 22:66-711) in “The Chamber of Hewn Stones” on the Temple grounds. Matthew 27 now begins his second trial before the Romans, again three distinct meetings: Pontus Pilate (Jn. 18:28-38), Herod Antipas (Luke 23:6-12), and a final meeting with Pilate (Jn. 19:1-16). Jesus will fair no better!
Matthew 27:11 tells us that Jesus is taken before the governor, Pilate, Fifth Prefect of the Roman province of Judaea [AD 26–36]. Precisely where, we cannot be sure. It might have been in the Tower of Antonia, on the NW corner of the Temple Mount ... but more likely it was into Herod’s old palace near the Jaffa Gate. “Don’t you hear the testimony they are bringing against you?” asks the governor (v. 13). Pilate knew Galilee well. It was a notorious place ― a rustic, countrified backwater, known for political unrest, bandits, and tax revolts. The local yokels there were always festering over something the Romans had done. Jesus hardly looks a threat ... and as a seasoned military man Pilate would certainly know a terrorist when he saw one. “But Jesus made no reply – not even to a single charge” (v. 14) ... fulfilling Isaiah 53:7 - "He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth".
Why the silence? Because Jesus does not want to be kept from the cross by any speech that is inspired by something other than His sense of office!
Why the silence? Because of His obedience to God. It was not a failure to act. It was fidelity to the One who sent Him. He was faithful not only to the content ... but to the method that God had instituted in the Kingdom of Truth ... even though He must sacrifice His life for this kind of fidelity.
It was not a divine accident that Jesus was crucified at 9 am (3rd hour) at the precise time of the morning sacrifice (Mark 15:25) and “yielded up his spirit” at 3 pm
(9th hour) – when the twilight lamb was
sacrificed to conclude the day (Matthew 27:50).
There is something about this country rabbi that Pilate finds puzzling. He is not like the religious leaders with their chest-length beards who one moment boast of a sovereign God, yet the next beg for lower taxes. Even Pilate’s superstitious wife, (tradition says Claudia Procula) sent to him a message while he was in the judgment hall (v. 19) saying, “Don’t have anything to do with that innocent man, for I have suffered a great deal today in a dream because of him.”
Genuinely struck by the silence and the moral dignity of his prisoner and seeing through the malice of the people – Pilate the Governor proposes to the crowd a choice (Matthew 27):
v. 17 “Which one do you want me to release to you? Barabbas or Jesus, who is called
Christ?”
v. 21 “Which of the two do you want me to release to you?”
Read carefully and you will find that four times in Matthew 27, Pilate tried to free Jesus; four times he is swayed otherwise. So many voices – the voice of compromise ... expedience ... conscience ... politics. Pilate thought he could avoid making a choice. He washed his hands of Jesus. He climbed on the fence and sat down. But in not making a choice, he had made a choice. Rather than ask for God’s grace he asked for a bowl. Rather than invite Jesus to stay, Pilate sent him away.
“I am innocent of this Man’s blood . . . It is your responsibility” (v. 24)
There is a legend that says Pilate’s eternal home is a mountain lake in Lucerne, Switzerland where the uncorrupting corpse rises every Good Friday to sit on the bank and wash hands that can never come clean.
Within six years of Jesus being crucified, Vitellius, the Syrian governor, would remove Caiaphas and Pilate from power. An old 13th century, non-biblical work, Estoire del Saint Graal (Story of the Holy Grail) says he was set adrift in a boat by the Romans. Highly unlikely! In 36 A.D., following reports of cruelty in breaking up a Samaritan gathering on Mt. Gerizim, Pilate was ordered home to stand trial before Emperor Tiberius. By the time he arrived in Rome, Tiberius had died and Caligula ruled. Legend has it that he committed suicide, on the orders of the new Emperor.5
The trial of Jesus was a series of rushed, illegal, and unjust proceedings. Yet, when we fit it into the whole course of the world, we can only conclude that this is all that could possibly be expected to take place. Jesus is condemned by the world ... because our world is at odds with God. But I hasten to add ... the entire trial is, in fact, an example of the wise council of God ... because all things in the world must co-operate in pronouncing the death sentence on Christ – even an unlawful trial. Human responsibility and divine providence came together. In the end God ensured the trail was deliberate, controlled, and complete!
“Only Saying ...”
All 10 provinces have their own human rights commissions or tribunals. Specific terminology differs (i.e., commissions vs tribunals).
Do not take my word for it. I encourage you to read ‘The Problem with the Canadian Human Rights Commission,’ written by The Association for Reformed Political Action (ARPA) Canada, a grassroots Christian advocacy organization. https://arpacanada.ca/articles/the-problems/
The Pirkei Avot (Ethics of the Fathers) is approximately 1,800 to 2,000 years old, with its core teachings compiled into the Mishnah around 200–230 CE. It contains wisdom from sages living from roughly 300 BCE to 200 CE, making it a foundational, ancient text of rabbinic ethics.
The Sanhedrin was Israel’s supreme Jewish legislative, judicial, and administrative council in acting as the high court during the Second Temple period (516 BCE to 70 CE) Composed of 71 sages: 23 priests, 23 scribes, 23 elders – and the current high priest; smaller courts had 23, even 3 (cf. Numbers 11:16).
Philo, a prominent Jewish philosopher said Pilate’s rule was associated with "briberies, insults, robberies, outrages, wanton injustices, constantly repeated executions without trial, and ceaseless and grievous cruelty" (Legatio ad Gaium, 301-302).
Comments