He was executed for failing to honor gods nobody believes in anymore, and for 'corrupting the youth' with his teachings which are still studied and extremely highly regarded thousands of years after his death. It was the exact case with Galileo as well and generally with all names on the list. They are not punished directly for what they say, as there tend to be no laws explicitly against such, but instead with mostly fake charge sprung as a means of silencing them or attacking them, sometimes permanently. For instance in Galileo's case he was similarly imprisoned for life under 'suspicion of heresy.'

Just a few years before, two of his friends and students run autocratic goverment called "thirty tyrants". They got in power thanks to enemy city Sparta. They killed impressive number of people, tortured those oposed and so on.

Their distaste to democracy this rule was based on had to do with Socrates philosophy.

Si yeah, gods largely because there was a.) amnesty for things that went on during thirty tyrants period b.) Socrates himself was not actively perticipating in killing citizens and at one point ignored order to go and kill (presumably). He did not left the city either through he could nor opposed the rule.

When he was cocky during court case, he knew gods accusation is bullshit. He likely underestimated how those who were against his friends rule resented him and likely how much they seen his ideology as threat to their own freedom, life, democracy and what not.

Athens were quite short after bloody revolutions and pretending that it had nothing to do with anything except immediate charges just makes history boring and incomprehensible.

Socrates was not executed because he was misunderstood genius. He was executed because he was seen as very real threat.

As you mention Socrates was in no way involved with the thirty, and even openly opposed their orders - fully knowing it likely meant his head would end up on their chopping block sooner or later. I have immense admiration for him since he is one of the extremely few individuals in history that, in spite of numerous opportunities to do so, did not sway from his values to benefit friend, hurt foe, or even to enrich himself. Indeed in his trial I do not see any evidence of him underestimating anything. Rather it seems he was more than willing to let himself be unjustly killed if not only to show that his views of democracy were fully justified.

And that gets back quite directly to the point of this entire thread. Many things are not well decided by consensus. Major advances in science are sometimes actively and openly embraced by all, as was the case for relativity. But many times progress is met with vigorous opposition, not even on a technical level but on an inertial one. It was none other than Max Planck that witted, "Science progress one funeral at a time."

You claimed Socrates was killed for Gods that dont exist and that is not the case. None of what happened had anything to do with science or technology.

He was killed for his association with rule of thirty. The single act of not actively participating does not change that.

He was not actively opposed to that rule either in any way or shape. Other (numerous) people were actively opposed and died or were tortured for it. His values partially gave ideological background to rule of thirty.

He did underestimated situation. He was confident and surprised at the result.

He had no association with the thirty whatsoever. Two were former students. That's it. And not only did he not participate (nor would he have been invited to participate in any case) but he actively opposed them while telling them that he did not fear death - an assertion they undoubtedly would have put to the test, sooner or later, had their government lasted longer than 8 months.

And as for his trial the indictment against him read, "This indictment and affidavit is sworn by Meletus, the son of Meletus of Pitthos, against Socrates, the son of Sophroniscus of Alopece: Socrates is guilty of refusing to recognize the gods recognized by the state, and of introducing new divinities. He is also guilty of corrupting the youth. The penalty demanded is death." Socrates intentionally provoked the 500 jurors with statements such as, "Men of Athens, I honor and love you but I shall obey God rather than you, and while I have life and strength I shall never cease from the practice and teaching of philosophy." The use of "God" and not "Gods" was not an accident. When Socrates was asked to propose his own punishment (in lieu of death) he proposed he be rewarded.

He obviously was not surprised when he was found guilty. The jurors were 500 random Athenian men, hardly his compatriots. His parting words speak of his intention, "The hour of departure has arrived, and we go our ways - I to die, and you to live. Which to the better fate is known only to God." He knew he had lived a great life and one that would extend well beyond himself. His martyrdom here was the grand finale to emphasize the correctness of the unpopular things (within Athens) that he had been saying all along. He warned that Democracy can become an unreliable and capricious system. Democracy responded by murdering him. You're undoubtedly correct that some of the majority that decided he should be murdered were driven by a misguided lust for revenge. That is a key validation of everything he ever said, and he knew it would be.

"He was part of particularly deadly politics"

Haha. Human nature never changes.