That's my point. You (at least seem to be) conflating arrest and start of trial, or the real start of trial; technically arraignment, where they ask "how do you plea", has to be done within 48 hours or they can't hold you, but the point is the next bit of trial can be months or years after arraignment, which is messed up but here we are.

Though I did say I phrased my comment badly, a left over of an earlier draft.

Could be that the ex wife took a plea at the earliest possible point (like at arraignment), which would have shaved months if not years off.

The amount of time between arraginment and trials starting can be staggering.

This is what you get when you have all of the following:

a) a state mandated and funded (in the sense that the funds are not separate from the general budget) pension system

b) a population that is ever living longer, with a static retirement age (as opposed to having the retirement age linked to some percentile of life expectancy, etc. ; France has it more complicated, because it's pension system is not strictly age based but how many units of work one put in, as I understand it); otherwise this could have been happening all along in easily digestible chunks.

c) a birth rate that is lower than replacement (because that means that more and more retirees have to be supported by fewer and fewer working age people).

I guarantee something similar will happen e.g. in the US as soon as enough baby boomers die off to make it not political suicide.

How so? If anything, I think it's fucking them over least, logically speaking, as pushing back retirement will both a) delay the need for them to support the would be retirees, b) reduce the number of retires who eventually need to be supported, and c) have the would be retirees help pay for the current retirees for a few more years..

Unless unemployment and/youth unemployment is very high in France?

It's all relative to the amount of oil (and it's importance to the country's economy) that is being bought. See also, India which has been buying loads of oil at reduced prices.

There's more to it than that. There are tricks to writing head lines, especially if you care about clicks/read/papers sold (which to be fair, it is a headline. It's supposed to be an attention grabbing summery, not a detailed account. That's what the body is (supposed to be) for).

Active voice requires the subject (usually the first words in a sentence) to be the Iranian police, rather than the victim.

Iranian police, being violent oppressive tyrants = we know, yawn

17 yo student, dying = investment, care, click.

Same information, different focus, different reaction.

Over fragmentation is not a desired outcome either.

Some people are very invested in their culture, family history, ethnic or national roots, etc. And others, like me, couldn't care less.

The question is, what is gained by joining by a specific political organization (be that a nation state, supernational governing body such as the EU, a mutual protection pact such as NATO, etc.) and what it costs, and make the decision based on that.