In this task, you're expected to write answers to questions involving multiple references to the same entity. The answer to the question should be unambiguous and a phrase in the paragraph. Most questions can have only one correct answer.

[Q]: Passage: A professor at a college in California, Dr. Peter Proud, begins to have recurring dreams. In one nightmare, Proud appears to see a man murdered by a woman in a rowboat while he is swimming naked. The murdered man repeatedly cries, "Marcia, don't!"
Proud is haunted by his dreams and seeks medical treatment. He attends a "sleep lab" to try to decipher his dreams. However, the dreams do not register as being dreams; in fact, they do not register at all. One evening while watching television, several of his "visions" play out before him on a local documentary entitled "The Changing Face of America". He sees the arch and the church that have been dominating his dreams, and calls the television station to discover the location. Upon learning that the location of his "visions" is in Massachusetts, Proud and his girlfriend Nora travel there. In Massachusetts, the couple drive from town to town, but are unsuccessful until they arrive in Springfield. It is here that Proud begins to see familiar sights from his dreams, such as the bridge, the church, the Puritan statue, and others. Eventually, Peter locates Marcia, the mystery woman from his nightmares, and befriends her daughter Ann at a local country club.
Marcia is suspicious of Peter and curious about his motives and how he knows so much about her life. Ann and Peter eventually fall in love, to Marcia's disapproval, when she is made aware that Peter Proud is a reincarnation of her deceased husband.
Peter had discovered earlier that by re-enacting his dreams, he would stop having that particular dream/vision. The Lake Dream was his last nightmare to be conquered. The film ends as Peter Proud is drawn to the lake where the original crime was committed years ago, and suffers the same fate he did in his previous life. 
Question: What is the first name of the person that the mystery woman from Peter's nightmares is suspicious of?
[A]: Peter.


[Q]: Passage: En route to California to prospect for gold, ex-sheriff Hooker, professional gambler Fiske, and bounty hunter Luke Daly are forced to stop over in a tiny Mexican village by engine trouble on the ship they are taking. A desperate Leah Fuller hires the three men and local Vicente Madariaga, to rescue her husband, John, who is pinned under debris from a gold mine cave-in in hostile Apache territory.
During the harrowing journey, Luke tries to force himself on Leah late one night, forcing Hooker to intervene. Leah tells Hooker that where her husband is trapped, once was a boom town, but a volcano eruption wiped it out, leaving only a church steeple and the mine uncovered by lava. The resident priest called it the "garden of evil". The Indians now consider the volcano sacred. The group then arrives at the mine. They find John unconscious, and they free him.
Before John wakes up, Hooker sets the man's broken leg.  When John regains consciousness, he accuses Leah of using him to get gold. Hooker talks to Leah later, about what her husband said; after he tells her that he has spotted signs of Apaches nearby, she offers him and the others all the gold they have dug up to take her husband away that night, while she remains behind to make it look like they are all still there. The cynical Fiske unexpectedly offers to stay with her, but when he asks her what he is to her, she tells him, "you're nothing at all, just nothing.". 
Question: What is the last name of the person John accuses of using him?
[A]: Fuller.


[Q]: Passage: In 1951, with secret means of communications established, Wolters sent his first letter to Speer in five years.  He suggested that Speer move ahead with his memoirs.  In January 1953, Speer began work on his draft memoirs, and over the next year lengthy missives, sometimes written on tobacco wrappings or candy wrappers but most often on toilet paper, made their way to Wolters' office in Coesfeld.  Marion Riesser, who had continued as Wolters' secretary as he began private architectural practice, transcribed these notes into as many as forty closely typed pages per missive, and the draft totalled 1,100 pages.  Wolters objected that Speer called Hitler a criminal in the draft, and Speer presciently observed that he would likely lose a good many friends were the memoirs ever to be published.  Wolters had come to believe that reports of Nazi genocide were exaggerated by a factor of at least ten, that Hitler had not been given credit for the things he did right and that Germany had been harshly treated by the Allies.In the mid-1950s, Wolters quarrelled with Kempf who effectively dropped out of the network for a number of years, adding to the burden on Wolters and Riesser.  While Speer's pleas for his former associate and his former secretary to work together eventually brought about a healing of the breach, this was to some degree superficial as Kempf was aware that Wolters, even then, disagreed with Speer's opinions.  Wolters questioned Speer's readiness to accept responsibility for the Nazi regime's excesses and did not believe Speer had anything to apologise for, though the strength of his feelings on this point was kept from Speer—but not from Kempf and Riesser.Wolters was tireless in his efforts on behalf of Speer and his family to such an extent that his son, Fritz, later expressed feelings of neglect.  For Speer's fiftieth birthday in March 1955, Wolters gathered letters from many of Speer's friends and wartime associates, and saw to it that they made their way inside the walls of Spandau in time for Speer's birthday.  Wolters gave Speer's son Albert a summer job in his Düsseldorf office and a place to stay—in fact, Wolters hosted all six of the Speer children at one time or another.  By prior arrangement, he and Speer tried to get in touch with each other by telepathy one New Year's Eve—but both men fell asleep before midnight struck.Wolters constantly sought Speer's early release, which required the consent of the four occupying powers.  He engaged Düsseldorf attorney, and later state minister, Werner Schütz to lobby high German officials to get them to advocate Speer's release.  Schütz, who refused to ask for his expenses, was unsuccessful even though Lübke, West German President for the last seven years of Speer's incarceration, had worked under Speer.  Wolters had more success fending off denazification proceedings against Speer, collecting many affidavits in Speer's favor, including one from Tessenow whom Speer had shielded during the war.  Those proceedings dragged on for years, and were eventually ended by order of Willy Brandt, a strong supporter of Speer's.As early as 1956, Wolters feared the effect that disclosure of the GBI's eviction of Jewish tenants might have on Speer.  Wolters wrote to Kempf concerning the denazification proceedings, "I am only anxious about the matter of the clearance of Jew-flats in Berlin.  That could be a bullseye.  And this is the point to which the defense should direct itself ..."  In 1964, Speer mentioned to Wolters in a letter that he would need the Chronik as a reference in revising his memoirs upon his release.  Wolter's response was to have Riesser retype the entire Chronik, leaving out any mention of the GBI's involvement in the persecution of the Jews, without telling Speer what he was doing.  Wolters later wrote that he did this to correct mistakes, to leave out extraneous matters, and "above all to delete certain parts on the basis of which Speer and one or another of his colleagues could still have been prosecuted.  The Ludwigsburg Central office for 'war crimes' was still at work and an end of the persecution of National Socialists was not in sight."In April 1965, with only eighteen months left of Speer's sentence, Wolters wrote to him of their prospective reunion, "[I]t will have been twenty years since I saw you last.  What will there be between us old codgers, aside of course from happy memories of skiing tours in the long distant past[?] ... Will you come to me mainly to take receipt of the promised gift I have held for you in our cellar—that long cured Westphalian ham, and those patiently waiting bottles of your favorite nectar: Johannisberger 1937?  Could these things of the senses end up being all that there is between us?  I am so happy that the moment approaches, but my heart is heavy ..."According to Riesser, she thought that Wolters "was frightened of the reality of Speer". However, Kempf thought Wolters wished Speer ill.  Speer was unaware of the depth of Wolters' feelings, and later told his biographer-to-be Joachim Fest that Wolters was the closest friend he had.  Speer added that during the Spandau years, Wolters performed invaluable services for him and that he did not know how he would have survived Spandau without Wolters' assistance.Throughout the latter part of Speer's imprisonment, Wolters was a faithful correspondent, writing lengthy letters to Speer at least once a month, attempting to tell Speer everything that might interest him but nothing that might hurt him.  When Speer invented the concept of his "world wide walk", imagining his daily exercise around the prison yard to be segments in a long walk from Europe through Asia to North America, Wolters supplied Speer with details of what he would "see".  Speer later stated, "In a manner of speaking, Rudi Wolters accompanied me on these walks."  As midnight struck and October 1, 1966 began, Speer was released from Spandau Prison.  His last use of the clandestine message system was to have a telegram sent to Wolters, in which Speer jokingly asked Wolters to pick him up thirty-five kilometres south of Guadalajara, Mexico, which he had "reached" after walking 31,936 kilometres. 
Question: What were the names of the two people whose burdens were added to due to Kempf dropping out of the network for a number of years?
[A]:
Wolters.