Sylvie Andrieux - the French politician who remains innocent of embezzlement after being found guilty

Politicians - don't you just love 'em.

Somehow they just don't seem to be bound by the same rules as the rest of us.

At least it seems that way some of the time.

Take the case of two Socialist party members - Sylvie Andrieux and Harlem Désir

She has been a member of parliament for a Marseille (you can stick an "s" on the end of that if you wish, if you're reading this out loud in English) constituency for the past 16 years.

He has been a member of the European parliament since 1999 and also first secretary (to all intents and purposes, leader) of the party since October 2012.

So they're both seasoned politicians - right?

Sylvie Andrieux (screenshot from LCM report on opening of trial, March 2013)

On Wednesday, a court found Andrieux guilty of misappropriating public money - otherwise known as embezzlement to the rest of us - and was given a three year prison sentence with two of them suspended, as well as being fined €100,000 and being banned from holding public office for five years.

Not bad going for a politician who was elected to serve a fourth term in last year's parliamentary elections even though she was under investigation at the time.

The conviction means she's supposed to spend a year behind bars.

Except of course Andrieux is to appeal the ruling and, as such, is apparently still considered under French law to be innocent.

Huh?

Anyway, the news was enough to have Désir come out guns a-blazin' as he took refuge in the party's rules and regulations to deliver what can only be described as the weakest of responses.

Harlem Désir (screenshot from BFM TV interview March 2013)

"Following her conviction, Sylvie Andrieux will have to leave the party until the appeal process has run its course," he said.

"If she doesn't, I'll suggest to the National Office of the party (er...wouldn't that include your good self M Désir?) that, as required by the code of ethics adopted at our party congress last year in Toulouse, she be suspended until the outcome of the appeal.

Strong words indeed and a perfect example of leadership qualities.

Anyone fancy Désir to be the country's next president?

Sheesh.

Come on M. Desir.

Show some cojones.

Just sack the woman!

Even though Andrieux has said she won't be standing in next year's local elections, she still has her seat in parliament.

And before you start thinking that a conviction of any sort marks the end of her of political career, consider this.

Back in 1998 a former head of the anti-racist group SOS-Racisme was given an 18-month suspended sentence and fined 30,000 after being found guilty of having misused corporate assets to receive a "fictional" salary.

And that man was...you've guessed it.

You're never too old to learn

Just ask Louise del Busto Gomez from the southwestern French town of Castres.

Louise del Busto Gomez swearing in ceremony (screenshot France 3)

 On Wednesday the 84-year-old - yes for the purposes of this story you might want to double check her age - officially became a lawyer at a swearing-in ceremony in the city of Toulouse.

And if that weren't enough, the octogenarian is not only qualified to practise in France but also in the Spanish city of Barcelona.

Not bad going for a woman who only began hitting the books after she had retired and had never even passed her baccalaureate or high school diploma.

Her story is one that must surely draw admiration from anyone and make us all sit up and take notice; a salutary lesson to us all.

Born in Barcelona in 1928, Gomez fled Spain during the country's civil war when she was just 11 years old, arriving in this country as a refugee.

"The day on which Franco entered Barcelona, I left the city on foot and made my way to the border with others who were escaping," she told reporters shortly after her swearing-in ceremony.

Gomez made a life for herself in France, meeting her husband Victor, bringing up two children, settling in Castres and over the years holding a variety of jobs and doing, "a bit of this and a bit of that" from helping out during harvest time, typing for a firm of solicitors, cleaning and a decade spent as a sales assistant at the local Monoprix supermarket.

When Gomez retired, she became involved in a local consumer rights association and that's when her late husband began encouraging her to pursue her studies.

 Maître Louise del Busto Gomez (screenshot France3 report)

She didn't choose the easiest of paths though; not only enrolling at the law faculty in Toulouse but also one in Barcelona at the same time.

"As far as I was concerned, Franco's Spain had deprived me of my childhood," she said.

"That's why I wanted to return to study in the city I was born."

"I had to retake all the exams necessary - in Spanish, and that wasn't easy for me because I had a French accent."

And now Gomez has qualified to practise here in France as well, attending the swearing-in ceremony in Toulouse on Wednesday.

'I'm especially moved because this ceremony made me think about my husband," Gomez said after the ceremony.

"He always encouraged me and told me I could do it," she continued

"And it's thanks to him that I can turn round today and say I'm a lawyer."

Court allows couple to wed in spite of parents "Napoleonic law" bid to stop marriage

Here's a warning wealth word reading if you're a foreigner wanting to marry a French national.

Make sure you have the approval of your future in-laws because if they're not happy with the upcoming nuptials they might seek recourse in an archaic law preventing the marriage from going ahead.

"Not possible," you might be thinking, especially if both the prospective bride and groom are beyond the age of consent.

Wrong.

Image from Wikipedia, author - Musaromana

It can, and indeed did happen in November when the parents of the groom-to-be, Stéphane Sage, stepped in to prevent him from tying the knot with his future intended Man Sin Ma (known as Mandy) from Hong Kong.

The couple are both in their mid-20s but Page's parents objected to his choice of bride and resorted to a law dating from 1803 to stop the marriage from going ahead.

They succeeded and the ceremony was postponed while the couple went to court to have the legal objection overruled.

The problems for the couple came to a head in November just hours before they were due to be married in the town of Meylan in the southeastern French département of Isère.

The banns required by law had been removed from the town hall as Sage's parents, disapproving of the marriage as they reportedly thought Mandy was "only interested in gaining French nationality to be able to stay in the country" had successfully sought to have them withdrawn just as was their right under article 173 of the civil code.

It states that "The father and the mother, or by default the grandparents, may oppose the marriage of their children or descendants even if they've reached the age of majority."

Archaic and anachronistic perhaps, belonging as it does to Napoleonic times, but the parents were fully within their legal rights as it has never been repealed.

This week though the couple succeeded in having the decision overturned and a court ruled that they were free to marry as "There was no objective reason to justify the (parents') decision."

Sage's mother and father now have one month in which to appeal the ruling and, if what the 25-year-old told Agence France Presse is true, then both he and his fiancée are surely on tenterhooks waiting for their next move.

"At first they said Mandy only wanted to marry me to get papers," he told AFP.

"Now they're accusing her of being a spy for the Chinese government."

That's what happens when your prospective "in-laws from Hell" come from a country which has far too many laws on its books.

You have been warned.

The problems of Modane - a French town and a laxative

It's winter here in Europe, just to state the obvious.

And of course that means snow and enough of it hopefully for French ski resorts and surrounding towns to do a booming business in tourism.

But one small town in the département of Savoie in the French Alps has other thoughts on its mind at the moment as its elected officials decide whether to take a drugs manufacturer to court because of an advertising campaign that potentially damages the image of the townsfolk.

Intrigued? Then read on.

The town is Modane with a population of almost 4,000 and perhaps best known for its international TGV station as it's close to the border with Italy.

The company is Cooper, "a laboratory dedicated to the needs of pharmacists," as its website explains, and which counts amongst its products a certain laxative called...yes you've guessed..."Modane".

The problems began for the mayor of the former - the town that is - when he had his attention drawn to the advertising campaign of the latter - the manufacturer of the drug offering relief for constipation - which started a couple of weeks ago.

It apparently contains a visual which is a little too suggestive in which the drug is heralded as promised relief for bowel difficulties to someone seated just a tad too long on the "throne".

Now before you start cracking all the same sort of jokes that have been entertaining some corners of the French media, this is a serious business as far as the town's mayor Jean-Claude Raffin is concerned and he's currently considering whether to resort to the courts to avoid any "confusion" and "embarrassment" that might ensue.

And he could well have the weight of French justice on his side as the names of villages, towns municipalities and départements are protected by law in France to ensure that there's no "infringement on the earlier rights of a local authority including its name, image or reputation."

According to the regional newspaper Le Dauphiné libéré, an appeals court in Paris interpreted that two years ago in a ruling to mean that "intellectual property cannon be adopted as a trade mark for a product that might contravene those rights."

If you're up to it you can read an explanation of the law here in French.

But as far as Cooper is concerned, the product in no way breaches that ruling, as its president, Pierre-André Martel, explains.

"The drug first came on to the market back in 1962," he says.

"But it was no longer covered by medical insurance for reimbursement from 2006 and so since then we have been advertising it."

One to follow?

French motorcyclist fined for wearing contact lenses

All right the headline is a little misleading as will become clear. But in essence it's what happened.

Once again it's time to say "road users in France beware".

After the recent case of a motorist being fined (€22) for smoking behind the wheel of his car, comes the story of a motorcyclist being pulled over for not "having glasses about his person" - to put it in good "police speak".

It happened last Tuesday on the streets of the French capital as Jérôme, an engineer, set out on his motor scooter to an appointment at the dentist.

At one point on his journey he ran a traffic light as it turned amber to "avoid braking too suddenly". But as (bad) luck would have it a couple of police officers saw him and he was stopped.

Now, what would have been a standard infraction with a possible €22 fine quickly escalated to something a little more absurd as he was asked for his papers, which the 37-year-old duly handed over.

Jérôme you see is near-sighted and as such required by law to wear glasses, or at least have them somewhere in the vehicle when driving, although the language on his licence puts it in a more gobbledygook fashion than that.

At least that's how the officers on duty interpreted the law.

Well he wasn't wearing glasses, but he was wearing contact lenses, which you might be thinking would have conformed with the sense of what was actually written on his licence.

Er....think again.

Because he didn't have a supplementary pair of glasses with him, one of the police officers handed Jérôme a €90 fine and lopped three points from him for "driving a vehicle without respecting the restrictions mentioned on his licence."

What's more he also advised him to "read the highway code again."

And that's exactly what Jérôme did, but he couldn't find the exact text to which the officer was referring and has decided to contest the fine.

"I don't consider it to be justified," he said.

"I'm not a danger to society and besides without lenses I don't see anything."

He's not alone in thinking the officer overreacted and has of Jean-Baptiste Iosca, a lawyer specialising in the rules of the road and traffic contraventions.

"The law requiring all drivers to carry a pair of glasses in the glove compartment of the vehicle was repealed in 1997," he said.

"I dealt with a similar case in May this year and my client was not charged."

Um. Who should it be Jérôme rereading the highway code?