I object to that question. What possible reason does the judge have to ask that?
Pigs should not wear black robes. It makes their snouts look funny...
At best, the judge wants to eliminate the possibility of appeal based upon incomplete or incompetent representation.
At worst, the judge want to taint the jury by making them wonder if GZ is hiding something by not being willing to testify.
If the jury was not present when she asked, she wasn't out of order. There have been criminal cases where a defendant didn't testify, was convicted, and then argued on appeal that "my lawyer didn't let me testify." So it's not uncommon for the trial judge to ask the defendant personally if he wants to testify, to preclude that kind of later argument.
If the jury was present, on the other hand, this was way out of line and probably reversible error.
Do judges routinely ask this question? Or is it left to the attorney to say so?