Mohammad. He waged war against non-believers and took 1/5 of the spoils.
Thomas Jefferson for no electricity in the slave hovels.
Not to get into too much speculation here (not the time or place), but the dude was crucified. The Romans were nasty, but they didn’t crucify people for knocking over tables. And they didn’t crucify them for getting into kerfuffles with local Jewish religious leaders. They crucified them for posing a threat to Roman rule. It was a punishment for escaped slaves and enemies of the state. I tend to agree with Reza Aslan in thinking that “Wait, there is a whole story of political revolution or sedition here that is missing, or that is getting lost in the shuffle somehow”.
The dude obviously did something, all’s I’m saying.
I was trying very hard to come up with a joke along the lines of “Muhammad wouldn’t be jailed, he’d be labeled a terrorist and have a run-in with a drone”, but I kept running afoul of Poe’s Law. So I give up.
Personally, after spending some time with the history of late antiquity, I quite like Muhammad. He’s the only religious leader I’ve seen who seems to behave like a normal person from the the period. Mystics and holy men? They often give me the willies, a bit. Wage war, play politics, take territory, get booty? *That *I recognize. Sounds like one of the lads.
Not sure if you’re joking, but of course many of the Founding Fathers would go to jail for keeping humans in slavery.
Jefferson might be charged with rape too, as I assume would lots of other slave owners.
It’s a joke, but it’s also a comment on how almost everything would be against the law after a sufficient amount of time passes.
Hannibal would be jailed for endangering elephants, and Bob Newhart would be a Crown witness in the prosecution of Sir Walter Raleigh.
Andrew Jackson was 6’1". If he was little, I don’t want to know who you consider tall.
I’ll bet he wasn’t wearing the proper hi-vis, life-jacket when he went on his stroll across the Sea of Galilee, either. That stuff lands you in deep do-dos these days.
Did he have an alcohol-serving license when he just decided to turn some perfectly good water into wine? Were there minors present?
And, sorry, but you can’t just decide to ‘Feed 5,000’ people on a whim - these things take time. There are permits, food handling regulations, correct staff numbers - man, that would take weeks to set up.
He weighed 145 lbs. That is not a big guy.
ISTR reading that he also had opponents executed. He’d totally wind up on trial for genocide, if he didn’t get blown up in an airstrike first.
Lord Byron.
Although not for long 
Murder, at least.
Let’s see what else we can nail Muhammad for:
Polygamy. He had, what, thirteen wives? And don’t come running to me with Islamic jurisprudence. I’m pretty sure that Sharia law lets you have a maximum of four.
Owning slaves. Despite being fairly liberal for his time when it came to slavery, he is reported to have owned some himself.
OK, enough with picking on poor Muhammad. I’m starting to feel dirty. In any case, as pointed out upthread, it’s easy to get into selective prosecution when you talk about history. A bit off topic, but I recently stumbled over an anti-Islamic person on the interwebs who seemed to have a hangup about the Umayyad conquest of Spain. “It was violent and nasty!” Well, no kidding, Captain Obvious. It was a conquest. What, do you think that the Romans came bearing flowers and balloons?
BTW, do you know who really gets it when it comes to selective prosecution? The Vandals. One little takeover of North Africa and a sack of Rome, and now they’re the people posting misinformation on Wikipedia. At least the Goths should get it as bad, they sacked Rome first. But what did they get? A style of architecture, a genre of horror fiction, and now they’re the cute teenagers who wear black makeup and read fantasy novels. It’s really not fair.