According to Trinitarians, if Jesus was saying things that clearly made Him out to be God, why didn't Caiaphas mention it at Jesus' trial? Jesus claiming to be God would have been a clear case of blasphemy (unless, of course, he actually was God).
Yet before his trial, according to Matthew 26

&quot;Now the chief priests and the whole Sanhedrini were seeking false
testimony against Jesus in order to put Him to death. 60 But they did
not find any, though many false witnesses came forward.&quot;

Given Trinitarians claim there is clear evidence of Jesus claiming to be God (such as 'Before Abraham was, I am' and 'I and the Father are one') and that the statements were made publicly in front of a hostile group of scribes and Pharisees, why couldn't Caiaphas find any witnesses to attest to these statements, and instead had to seek false testimony in order to put Him to death?
A simple statement, like “I am God” is unambiguous.  Had Jesus ever uttered those three words in front of witnesses while on earth, he would have been instantly stoned to death by outraged Jews who would not have held to the protocol of only the Roman government having the authority to put people to death – they would have done it behind the Roman’s backs. To the Jewish people, it is blasphemy for any human to claim to be God. So, because Jesus had to die as the Son of God the way the scriptures foretold (which ruled out being stoned to death), his actions spoke for him, until the time eventually came to speak clearly. His actions were such that he did things only God could do, (especially forgiving sins which no prophet prior to him had ever done) and it was those actions that rattled the religious leaders so much. They knew that the people could see how extraordinary Jesus was; that the people were listening to Jesus’ teaching; that many were following him.
There were witnesses to Jesus saying things like, “If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death”, and “If ye believe not that I am [he], ye shall die in your sins”, and “the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment to the Son, that all [men] should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father”, and much more like that. Yet at the time of trial before the Sanhedrin, those statements in and of themselves could not be made to equate with “I am God”. Of course, in light of Jesus’ resurrection they most certainly can! But you ask about his trial and Caiaphas not “mentioning” any clear statement of Jesus that made him out to be God. That is because Jesus never clearly said, “I am God.” Even when Jesus said that he existed before Abraham lived; “Before Abraham was, I Am” – and they tried to stone him to death for that – those five words fall short of a legal charge of the blasphemy of a man claiming to be God.
That is why false witnesses had to be listened to, because even though many of those religious leaders had heard astounding claims from Jesus’ own lips, they could not (legally speaking) amount to evidence that Jesus had publicly claimed to be God. He never did. And for good reason.
For a start, that could be misleading (according to Trinitarian understanding of the complexity of the one Being of God). There is more to the one Being of God than the Word incarnate, made flesh, walking amongst other men who beheld his glory, that of the only-begotten of the Father (John 1:1-14). Jesus knew that if they didn’t understand that complex truth, they would instantly claim grounds for stoning him to death, but he had to complete his mission on earth. “My time has not yet come” he said several times during that mission. But when his time DID come, he went for it, telling those who hatefully asked him if he was “the Christ, the Son of the Blessed”, he said, “I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.” (Mark 14:61-64)
This led to instant cries of “Blasphemy!” and they all condemned him as guilty of death, according to Jewish law (not Roman law).
That is why Jesus held back openly stating his deity until that moment, when his time had come. Then the embarrassment of false witnesses and clashing testimonies could be swept aside by them. Jesus stating that he was also the Son of God, “the Son of the Blessed”, was too much for those who only thought him to be a man. Those who were prepared to accept that Jesus was a good man still knew the significance of him claiming to be the Son of God – which went way beyond mere humanity! Were it not true, it would have been blasphemy. They thought it was not true. But if it is true that Jesus is God incarnate, then it is blasphemy for people to deny that truth.