Matthew 26:60

Found none. They were unable to find even false witnesses whose tales could be made to agree. They had been looking for evidence on which to build a case, but evidently their efforts had proved utterly fruitless. According to the Mishnah all witnesses must be cross-examined in order to test the accuracy of their statements, and where witnesses contradict one another their evidence becomes invalid (Sanhedrin 5.1, 2, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, pp. 255, 256). The testimony of these false witnesses apparently broke down under cross-examination.

Two false witnesses. The testimony of these witnesses appeared to agree, and according to Mosaic law (Deut. 17:6; 19:15), what they reported was presumed to be true. The judges — in this case the Sanhedrin — were obligated to make every effort to see that justice was done (Deut. 25:1). They were diligently to cross-examine witnesses to determine whether what the witnesses said was true or not (Deut. 19:16-19). But here were men of the supreme court of Israel conniving with false witnesses in their perjury, in direct violation of Mosaic law (see Ex. 23:1), and of the ninth commandment of the Decalogue (Ex. 20:16). Even these last two witnesses actually disagreed (Mark 14:59) on essential points, and their testimony was vague and contradictory. Nevertheless, the high priest pretended to accept their testimony (Matt. 26:62), although he knew well that Jesus could not be sentenced on the basis of it. This, his further conduct reveals (vs. 62, 63).