The Roman governor was desirous to avoid any uproar among the people, for there had already been an attempted coup d’ẻtat in the Caesar’s palace, which failed probably because of the information, brought to the people of the Court by the Jews. That was why Pilate kept silent and mutual with all the Jewish groups. He was prepared to do as they wished lest they would complain against him to Rome as an unfaithful official.
With all self-esteem, Pilate invited the leaders of the people and the chief priests, allowing a great number of the people to appear as witnesses. He stood shortly before the Jewish Passover and delivered his speech, proving that Jesus was not guilty, but innocent; and stating that he was willing to release him, after he had examined the case exactly before the representatives of the high council. Now that the official investigation by the experts had proved that Jesus was a peaceful man, all the complaints against him appeared as false and empty. In his decision, Pilate relied on the judgment of Herod, the citizen who was more familiar with the customs of his country, and the fox that had sent Jesus back to him as a harmless clown.
Pilate was prepared to humor the Jews by having Jesus flagellated. He thought that such an arrangement would both satisfy the multitudes and fear the accused that he would discontinue his call and preaching. Furthermore, the double-minded Pilate tried to make the people themselves responsible for the final decision, and gave them the choice to release one prisoner according to the Roman custom at the Jewish Passover. In this way, the representative of the civil right wished that the people would choose Jesus, the meek and the perfect. But the multitudes cried out all at once: "Release to us the great Barabbas, the murderous, rebellious hero; and he who is quite and calling to repentance and return let him away with you." The strange thing is that the name of the murderer "Barabbas" means "son of the father." However, the people refused the true Son of the heavenly Father, for they were not abiding in the Lord, and consequently the voice of such people was not the voice of the Lord. We are all unrighteous and inclined to evil. The people’s judgment is always earthly, and not divine.
After this crying, Pilate tried once again to raise the voice of the truth and to convince those concerned that shedding blood one hour before the Passover was inhuman.
Then the multitudes flared up crying out in one voice the same word, which the chief priests, uttered: "Crucify him, crucify him!" Crucifixion was not a Jewish custom, but a Roman punishment adopted by the Romans against their runaway slaves and non-Roman criminals. The form of execution the Romans applied for Roman criminals was beheading. Thus we see that the death on the accursed cross was applied for non-Roman criminals.
Pilate was aware that the meek Jesus was innocent and not deserving the death of the cross. So he said openly: "If anyone of you can bring evidences against him, let him do it." Though he was aware of Jesus’ innocence, the complaisant Pilate was prepared to have the Just flagellated to satisfy the mobs and thereafter release Jesus.
But the multitudes grew more furious and outrageous, and began to move angrily. They were like the beasts, which tasted the blood and longed for a new prey. They cried out with loud voices: "Crucify him, crucify him!"
The people did not stop their great noises and outcries until Pilate, frightful and sorrowful, yielded to their importunity. The governor was not prepared to sacrifice his office for the truth’s sake. He rather released the Romans’ mutinous enemy, and sentenced the Prince of Peace to death on the cross. This sentence was a lawful crime. It meant at the same time that the Lord of heaven was unjustly condemned by the representative of the earth. The human right was then somewhat just, but the judge failed in making the truth prevail, for he was selfish as we are. If you were in Pilate’s place would you oppose yourself to the danger of being ravened by the agitated people for the sake of an unimportant poor young man?