I'm not Yanniru but whattaya thinka this?
"...the Romans crucified Jesus under the askance of the jewish crowd."
I hope you agree with the following:
First, there's no case to make. They're all dead. A fair court would not convict anyone based on what someone else did.
Second, the New Testament account is not a legal case against anyone. The story is told only for the benefit of all humanity in the person of anyone who is willing to consider its lessons and carols.
Third, Jesus said from the Cross, "Father, forgive them ... for they know not what they do."
Fourth, most societies living at that time have not left a good record of their times. We're lucky to have this one, "warts and all."
The ancient Romans were over the ancient Jews militarily. The Romans released Barabbas, a convicted murderer, as a political convenience when it was demanded by unnamed shouting persons. They then executed Jesus although they found him innocent. Does it seem fair by the washing of Pilate's hands to release the Roman government from culpability? Nice trick. I'd like to try that with my student loan balance
"I am almost positive that the jewish crowd wanted Him dead for blasphemy. Now I have also heard that they believe him to be one of the great prophets. Does blasphemy sound like a characteristic of a jewish prophet? It seems illogical to me."
I think it would be more illogical if the same person held both views. However, as I have read it, there were:
1) some Jews who felt Jesus should be much more the military leader against Roman occupation
2) some Jews who felt Jesus was Wonderful
3) some Jews who felt Jesus, by attracting and exciting crowds, was going to cause Rome to perform its periodic crowd control brutality more often
4) some Jews who were ticked off at Jesus' attacks on their hypocrisy
5) some Jews who never heard of him during his lifetime
Many Jews were the first Christians. Some believed in including "Gentiles" ( a term I think is quite silly ) and some did not want to include them. Things evolved from there.