In an adversarial system (which the US and Canada and UK are), the judge is not supposed to challenge evidence unless it's glaringly, obviously adrift from reality. That's the job of the defense lawyer. In civil law systems the roles of the judge and prosecutor are combined and responsility for bad decisions is distributed differently.

The prosecution must still present evidence that proves guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

"Something something IP address" sort of evidence that the article describes doesn't seem to cut it.