Given a document, an entity and its sentiment towards the entity, verify if it is the correct sentiment towards the entity. Answer should be yes or no. Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link].

[EX Q]: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Pope Francis Letter is Negative . Well  it’s now happened.  The great scandal of the modern Catholic Church  —  its  tolerance for clergy who abuse children  and  its  laxity when dealing with bishops who themselves tolerated or enabled priest-abusers — now touches directly on  the pope himself .
 It ’s worth laying out the timeline clearly. In 2015  Pope Francis appointed Juan Barros Madrid to the bishopric of Osorno  Chile. The appointment was met with local protests  among Catholics and non-Catholics who believed that Barros was implicated in the crimes of child sexual abuse committed by his friend Father Fernando Karadima  a prominent Chilean churchman who habitually kissed and fondled boys. In the days after the installation of Barros at Osono  Pope Francis told an archbishop that there was “no objective reason at all” to oppose the appointment. The Vatican’s own department governing these matters  the Congregation for Bishops  released a statement saying they had “carefully examined the prelate’s candidature and did not find objective reasons to preclude the appointment.”
In the months following the appointment   Pope Francis  became extremely dismissive of complaints. “Osorno suffers  yes  for silliness ”  the pope  said of the outrage in the media. “Think with your head  and do not be carried away by the noses of the leftists  who are the ones who put this thing together ” he added.
A few weeks ago   Pope Francis ’s visit to Chile was marked by protests  and  the pope  continued  his  extremely brusque dismissal. “The day I see proof against Bishop Barros  then I will talk ” the pontiff said. “There is not a single piece of evidence against  him . It is all slander. Is that clear?”  Francis  said that no victims had come forward to  him . It was apparently this statement that caused Cardinal Sean O’Malley of Boston to scramble down to Chile and meet with the pope. After O’Malley’s intervention  presumably  the pope issued a half-apology  but repeated that the accusations against Barros were “slander” before adding  “I’m convinced he’s innocent.”
And now the news drops. In the time between the pope’s appointment of Barros and his commentary about protesters being carried away by leftists  members of the Vatican’s own Commission for the Protection of Minors gathered to discuss the appointment. They had a representative hand-deliver a letter to Pope Francis  from Carlos Cruz. The letter alleged  in lurid detail  that Barros had personally witnessed the abuse of Cruz at Karadima’s hands. Members of the commission photographed the hand-off of the letter to  the pope   to reassure Cruz that they were doing everything possible to make his cry for justice heard.
The facts as we know them leave us with a few interpretations. 1)  Pope Francis  simply never read the letter  ignoring this extraordinary intervention by the Vatican’s own commission on a matter of public controversy for  his  pontificate. 2)  Francis  read the letter but forgot about it  reverting to  his  original understanding of the case. 3)  Francis  read the letter  but stuck to  his  decision for Barros  committing unintentional or intentional deceptions about the state of  his  knowledge of the accusations. 4)  He  read the letter  but either doubted the accusations in it  or at least found them so unimpressive that  he  did not decide to follow up on them.
The first explanation would mean that  Francis  was culpably ignorant. The second that  he  may lack the mental or moral faculties to competently govern the Catholic Church. The third that  he  is too stubborn or vain to change course in the face of evidence. And the last that  he  has little trust or faith in the Commission on the Protection of Minors to pass on credible counsel to  him . Perhaps more reporting or disclosure will change our understanding  but none of these are satisfactory.
[EX A]: no

[EX Q]: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Jeremy Corbyn is Neutral . Jeremy Corbyn to declare in speech "Labour is ready" for government.
LONDON â  Jeremy Corbyn  will tell activists Labour "is ready for government" and that it is a "government in waiting" in his speech to close the party's conference on Wednesday.
Following rifts in the cabinet over how to deal with Brexit becoming public in recent weeks   Corbyn  will say: "The Tories are more interested in posturing for personal advantage than in getting the best deal for Britain. Never has the national interest been so ill-served on such a vital issue. If there were no other reason for the Tories to go  their self-interested Brexit bungling would be reason enough.
 Corbyn  will challenge the Conservative government to "pull yourself together" after Theresa May's Florence speech failed to break the stalemate in Brexit negotiations  with European Council president Donald Tusk saying on Tuesday that there has not been "sufficient progress" to allow talks to advance.
In his keynote speech   Corbyn  will say: "Yes  we didnât do quite well enough and we remain in opposition for now. But we have become a government-in-waiting.
 Corbyn  will say: "The disregard for rampant inequality  the hollowing out of our public services  the disdain for the powerless and the poor have made our society more brutal and less caring.
A Labour source said on Tuesday that  Corbyn  will also use his conference speech to announce details of a number of new policies.
[EX A]: yes

[EX Q]: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Emma Cline is Negative . Novelist Emma Cline  is counter-suing  her  ex-boyfriend's suit against  her  alleging that  she  plagiarized  her  2016 bestseller The Girls from his own work.
 Cline 's novel â which features a 60s-era Manson-like cult as seen from the perspective of its followers â stuck around for 12 weeks on the New York Times bestseller list and is the first installment in a three-book Penguin Random House deal that reportedly topped $2 million.
The former boyfriend  Chaz Reetz-Laiolo  alleges  Cline  installed spyware on her computer before selling it to him in order to record keystrokes on the computer. "Using the spyware " the complaint says  "she obtained his email password  which she then used to access and systematically surveil his private email obsessively over a period of years."
However  Emma Cline's complaint calls this "a ludicrous theory" and counters with the claim that this is just the latest in a "two-year assault on  Cline âs mental health and literary reputation" from an abusive Reetz-Laiolo. Any alleged plagiarism  the complaint states  is limited to a "few brief phrases or facts " which are not subject to copyright protection and which don't appear in the published version of the novel. Both parties are requesting the case go to trial.
Most plagiarism cases are tough to prove  and this one is made harder by both the lack of evidence and lack of copyright protections available for most of the instances of alleged plagiarism cited by Reetz-Laiolo. So why file the complaint at all? The initial 15-page letter first sent to  Cline  in February 2017 by Reetz-Laiolo's law firm Boies Schiller Flexner LLP might hold a clue: âWe believe [. . .] that it may be fruitful to engage in a confidential negotiation or mediation to determine whether our clients can reach a resolution with you rather than file our complaint â the letter states.  Cline 's argument doesn't mince words when concluding what the fruitful resolution that interests Reetz-Laiolo could turn out to be  stating his actions were "undoubtedly in the hope of a financial windfall."
One element that both parties can agree on:  Cline  did install spyware on  her  computer. According to  her  complaint   she  installed it while they were together because Reetz-Laiolo used it and  she  wanted to confirm his infidelity. Reetz-Laiolo's argument that  she  tracked his email address after selling him the laptop in 2013  after they were no longer together  hinges on the assumption that  she  somehow updated this software to allow  her  to remotely access it.
David Boies  the founder of the Boies Schiller Flexner firm  was named as an attorney in the February 2017 letter to  Cline   according to a New Yorker article on the firm  though his name does not appear in the complaint filed by Reetz-Laiolo. David Boies has also featured in another New Yorker article reporting that he and his firm worked for Harvey Weinstein to discredit women accusing Weinstein of rape. The early letter  according to the New Yorker  also claimed damages nearing $2 billion and  in a section titled âClineâs History of Manipulating Older Men â attempted to use her sexual history against her.
[EX A]:
yes