Pilate deserves more censure IMO than does Caiaphas. Caiaphas acted in the way he thought was right, which was to condemn someone he saw as a heretic and a threat to the religious order. Pilate knew Jesus was not guilty of anything worthy of death, but he gutlessly ordered that the sentence be carried out. It would be like seeing a judge today finding someone innocent, but ordering his execution anyway because "the crowd got ugly".
Pilate was a cruel and hard governor... he had an uneasy alliance with the Pharisees to keep peace but they despised each other. History paints Pilate as merciless and he did have Jesus crucified. Just speculating but I wonder if Pilate was jerking the Pharisees around with his threats to declare Jesus innocent and release Him. Jesus forgave and associated with prostitutes, tax collectors, lepers and outcasts. His few hostile encounters were with the religious and political leaders (see Matthew 23)... who ruled the people, instead of serving them (sound familiar?). Jesus wouldn’t even speak to Herod, but was strangely un-hostile to Pilate who condemned Him (go figure?). All in God’s redemptive plan I ‘spose.