Brief summary and three main points of the article Lerner (2001) provides a detailed description of the case which can be regarded as exemplary in many respects. One of the major peculiarities of the case, which is stressed by the author himself, is that the case is international in its nature. Thus, Thierry Gaitaud, an American citizen, who killed Americans in the territory of the USA, is tried in France. This becomes possible due to the defendant’s background, i.e. his parents are French. The extradition treaty between the USA and France permits “France to refuse to extradite its own citizens” (Lerner 2001, p. 2). More so, France “has been reluctant to extradite suspects who may face the death penalty” and Gaitaud is likely to face it if tried in California (Lerner 2001, p. 3). Lerner (2001) emphasises that the number of such cases will increase in the course of time due to the globalisation. Thus, the author stresses that this case requires special attention as similar cases are likely to become more common in the nearest future. Another important point highlighted by the author is concerned with the role of the judge in the investigation. Lerner (2001) notes that the judge plays a pivotal role during the trial as well as before it. The judge looks into the case and analyses evidence before the trial starts. The author stresses that this is beneficial for the defendant who does not have to rely on his/her lawyer. Thus, even though the defendant can have limited resources and hire less qualified lawyer, his interests will be secured by the system as the judge will try to reveal all possible pieces of evidence and analyse them properly (Lerner 2001, p. 14). The third major point to consider is concerned with the time spent in custody before the trial. The author reveals a lot of advantages of the French judicial system and tends to stress that it is fair and transparent. However, Lerner (2001) also sheds light on some drawbacks. The author argues that the French judicial procedure may take quite a long time (Lerner 2001, p. 19). The author notes that custody of five years (before the trial) is common in France, especially when it comes to grave crimes. During this time, the accused can request that he/she “be released” (Lerner 2001, p. 19). However, the cases when those accused of serious crimes were released are very rare. Analysis of three important points of the article The role of the judge Lerner (2001) pays a lot of attention to the distribution of roles during the trial. It is necessary to note that the roles differ in French and Australian courts. This difference is quite a disputable issue as some scholars support the French system, while others argue that Australian model (which is similar to the British and American ones) is more effective. Thus, French judges dominate during the trial. Lerner (2001) notes that this is effective as it ensures fairness and precision. On the one hand, it is beneficial for the defendant as his/her lawyer may be less experienced or qualified to analyse evidence. A lot of researchers stress that Australian legal system is far from being affordable and many people are in less favourable situation than such opponents as governmental organisations or big companies who can hire high-profile lawyers (Unaffordable and