Ok. In that case it is a question of individual versus collective guilt. My tendency is to see the crucifiction as a totally local issue. I have read historical accounts which indicate (and plausibly so) that it is unlikely that Pilot even had anything to do with the approval of Jesus' execution. There was likely a standing order to crucify any "politician" who might create trouble during passover.
Indeed, it would seem that local priests would have had a very good motive for having Jesus arrested. If one would like to lay guilt upon anyone, it should be those priests or local leaders.
Whereas in Democratic society at least the leaders represent the people to some extent, at the time, the "masses" certainly could not be given collective guilt for a miscarriage of justice. Of course, was it really a miscarriage of justice? Wasn't Jesus actually guilty of the crimes for which he was accused? If so, then his execution was perfectly legal.
Any thoughts?
you have summed up very well my general thoughts, and your specific knowledge is greater than mine. modern political issues and religious/social sensitivities and biases are the issue here when the question comes up. Life was vastly cheaper in this time period in the early roman empire, particularly for non-citizens, and I have often wondered if his execution really got much notice locally at the time. the fact that jews do not view him as even a footnote or a martyr indicates that it might not have.