In an action brought against Driver by Walker's legal representative, the only proofs that the legal representative offered on liability were that: (1) Walker, a pedestrian, was killed instantly while walking on the shoulder of the highway; (2) Driver was driving the car that struck Walker; and (3) there were no living witnesses to the accident other than Driver, who denied negligence. Assume the jurisdiction has adopted a rule of pure comparative negligence. If, at the end of the plaintiff's case, Driver moves for a directed verdict, the trial judge should 
grant the motion, because the legal representative has offered no specific evidence from which reasonable jurors may conclude that Driver was negligent.  grant the motion, because it is just as likely that Walker was negligent as that Driver was negligent.  deny the motion, unless Walker was walking with his back to traffic, in violation of the state highway code.  deny the motion, because, in the circumstances, negligence on the part of Driver may be inferred. 