Can a judge remove the requirement of a jury?
<p>From the song <em>The Trial</em> by Pink Floyd</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The evidence before the court is incontrovertible</p>
<p>There's no need for the jury to retire</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I know I shouldn't read too much into a song (which takes place in the mind of the protagonist), and I also know that &quot;showing feelings of an almost human nature&quot; is not a real crime, but I'd like to know if it has a little basis in reality. Is it legal for a judge to simply decide on a verdict because s/he decides the evidence is so strong that the jury (who have already sat through the case) isn't required?</p>

<h2>Yes</h2>

<p>It's called a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verdict#Directed_verdict" rel="nofollow noreferrer">directed verdict</a> (or <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_as_a_matter_of_law" rel="nofollow noreferrer">judgment as a matter of law</a> in the USA).</p>

<p>When the judge reaches the conclusion that, on the evidence, no reasonable jury could find otherwise, the judge may rule what the verdict shall be.</p>

united-kingdom jury judge