Was Pilate double-crossed by the Jewish leadership?

As I was reading this today, it struck me that the two statements made by the Jewish leadership here, are contradictory, in the light of the Old Testament scriptures below.

John 18: 29 - 32
Pilate then went out unto them, and said, What accusation bring ye against this man? They answered and said unto him, [b]1 - If he were not a malefactor, we would not have delivered him up unto thee[/b].

Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and judge him according to your law. The Jews therefore said unto him, [b]2 - It is not lawful for us to put any man to death[/b]: That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signifying what death he should die.

Deuteronomy 17:6
At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is [b]worthy of death be put to death[/b]; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.

The assembled priests and elders had tried to find two witness whose testimony agreed, to comply with this requirement. Eventually, they condemned Jesus out of His own mouth.

Matt 26
59 Now [b]the chief priests, and elders, and all the council, sought [u]false witness against Jesus[/u], to put him to death[/b];

64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
65 Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, [b]He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses?[/b] behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy. 66 What think ye?
[b]They answered and said, He is guilty of death[/b].

Deuteronomy 21:22
And if a man have committed [b]a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death[/b], and thou hang him on a tree:

(There is also this one, which is interesting, in that Jesus bore the death penalty to all who were 'worthy of death' under the Mosaic law.

Romans 1:32
Who [u]knowing the judgment of God[/u], that they which [u]commit such things[/u] [b]are worthy of death[/b], not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.)

My questions

What is the historical evidence that the Jews were not allowed to put people to death under their law, during Roman occupation?

Were all executions carried out [u]only[/u] according to Roman law, such as that intended for Barabbas?

Was the release of Barabbas, a particularly [i]special[/i] event when the Jews could get one of their own released from a [i]legitimate[/i] condemnation (under Roman law) to the death penalty?

Was it particularly mean that they framed Jesus to take his place, when He had done nothing for which even the [i]Romans[/i] would have crucified Him?

Thanks Phillip. That was a great answer - a very comforting one, in fact.

I asked my question(s) because as I've been reading through the gospels, I've noticed the duplicity of the 'elders', the Pharisees and the chief priests. This was the ruling class in Israel, who were all assembled when Jesus arrived after His arrest. They were willing to spit in His face, and strike Him - the religious toffs. I'd never really 'seen' it before, in all its awfulness.

Then, having been more than willing to pay Judas for betraying Jesus, when Judas gave the money back, they had the hypocrisy to say it couldn't be put back in the temple treasury, 'because it was the price of blood'. But they hadn't minded taking it [i]out[/i] of the temple treasury as 'the price of blood'.

Then, telling Pilate they would not have brought Jesus if He had not been a 'malefactor', but not saying what He had done, and leaving Pilate to incriminate himself. My admiration for Pilate increased, rather than decreased, because at least Pilate did have an escape - which was to swop Jesus for Barabbas (Barabbas also meaning 'son of the father').

As you pointed out, it is [i]wonderful[/i] how God had arranged for things to work out perfectly. T. Austin-Sparks also says 'God will have what He wants'. No-one can stand in His way. Amen. May we not stand in His way either, but co-operate with His higher purposes.