In any case, the most recent interview was on the chronology of the Passion narrative. Steinmann addressed the question of whether or not John has Passover on a different day than the Synoptics. He makes several interesting suggestions:
First, the statement that John makes that the Sabbath was a great Sabbath because it was the first day of the feast of unleavened bread should not make us think that Passover was on Saturday. The terms "feast of Passover" and the "days/feast of unleavened bread" were used interchangeably with one another the first century among Jews. This does not mean though that they were the same feast, since later comes after the former and is a distinct feast. Moreover, since the feast of unleavened bread is after Passover in the Jewish calender, all John is actually saying is that Saturday is the first day after Passover (i.e., the first day of the feast of unleavened bread!)- he's not saying Saturday is Passover. If we accept this interpretation, then John agrees with the Synoptics that passover was Friday that year.
Secondly, we are told by John that the high priest and other ruler didn't want to go into see Pilate because they were afraid of defiling themselves before eating the Passover. This would suggest in the minds of many interpreters that Passover was that evening and therefore on Saturday. Nevertheless, Steinmann makes the point that John highlights the fact that they came to see Pilate very early in the morning, that is, before sun-up. What John is suggesting here, he argues, is that the rulers did not eat the Passover the night before because they were too busy arresting Jesus and putting him on trial. Therefore, since the OT claimed that members of Israel had to eat the Passover in the evening/night or they would be cut off from the people of God, it was their intention to quickly have Jesus crucified so that they could eat the Passover before sun-up. They did not accomplish this and hence John is telling us that they are now cut off from Israel.
Lastly, in terms of the year, Steinmann points out that the year must be 33 A.D., since this was the only one of two years that Passover fell on Friday between 26-36 (the years of Pilate's tenure). 30 would be too early, because Jesus was baptized in late 29 (15th year of Tiberius). This is interesting because it coincides with Paul Maier's correlation of the events of the Passion narrative with political developments in Rome and the strained relation between Pilate and Tiberius after about 32. Hence, the overall chronology fits perfectly with other historical and political factors that we know.