One of the men accused of murdering Lee Rigby has offered no evidence in his defence.
Jurors at the Old Bailey were told not to draw any adverse inference from the fact that Michael Adebowale, 22, decided not to give or call any evidence in the case.
He and another man, Michael Adebolajo, 29, are accused of running the soldier down in a car and then hacking him to death with a meat cleaver and knives near Woolwich Barracks in south-east London on May 22.
Abbas Lakha QC, for Adebowale, told the court: "I offer no evidence."
Mr Justice Sweeney told the jury of eight women and four men: "That means that the evidence is now over. It means that the second defendant has chosen neither to give nor to call any evidence.
"May I tell you straightaway that you are not to draw any inference adverse to him from the fact that he has chosen not to give evidence.
"As I told you at the outset, the law is for me. I give you directions about it which you must follow."
Final speeches and summing up in the case are due to take place next week.
On Monday, the jury heard the first defendant, Adebolajo, say that his defence to the murder charge was that he is a soldier.
He told them: "I'm a soldier. I'm a soldier of Allah and I understand that some people might not recognise this because we do not wear fatigues and we do not go to the Brecon Beacons and train and this sort of thing.
"But we are still soldiers in the sight of Allah as a mujahid.
"This is all that matters: if Allah considers me a soldier, then I am a soldier." He also said Mr Rigby was attacked simply because he was the first soldier they spotted after deciding to target someone in the armed forces.
Both men are also accused of the attempted murder of a police officer and conspiracy to murder a police officer.
They deny all charges.
The trial was adjourned until next week.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article