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].

[Q]: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Michele Pihera is Neutral . The 16-year-old victim told investigators that she had been drinking at a bar with friends on Sunday night  then one of her friends called an Uber for the girl. She was picked up by Jagne who later allegedly assaulted her before dropping her off at her destination. Gwinnett Police Cpl.  Michele Pihera  said in a statement  âOnce  she  was dropped off at the apartment complex  she  began banging on several of the homes in the neighborhood  and one of those residents called 911. One of those neighbors did notice that  her  pants were around  her  ankles.â
According to police  the girl  appeared to be extremely intoxicated  police are currently not aware of which bar  the girl  was drinking at but are still investigating as bar employees could face charges for serving a minor. âI think that  she âll make a full recovery physically. I can only imagine  emotionally   she âll have a little bit longer of a recovery â  Pihera  said.
Police stated that evidence that they received from Uber corroborate  the girl âs claims  âWe know that from the start location to the end location it should have taken a short amount of time  but based on the trip data it took even longer. Again  more corroboration to  her  story â  Pihera  said. Investigators are now looking into whether or not anyone else has been assaulted by Jagne and have requested any victims to contact them as soon as possible.
Commenting on the case  Uber said in a statement  âWhatâs reported here is horrifying beyond words. Our thoughts are with the rider and  her  family during this time. This driver has been permanently removed from the app.â
[A]: yes


[Q]: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Schaffer Wice is Neutral . The media-savvy special prosecutors have colluded with the Fourth Estate to try — and convict — Paxton in the court of public opinion long before the case even comes to trial.  Wice  in particular is an aspiring media celebrity  serving as a TV “legal analyst” on Houston’s Channel 2 (KPRC) since 2003. Think of a male version of Nancy Grace or Greta Van Susteren — a Dan Abrams wannabe. One profile described the bombastic  Wice  as a “media magnet” who “never shies away from the spotlight.” The KPRC website brags that
Beginning the very day  Schaffer  and Wice were appointed by Becker  the prosecutors were in contact with the media  shamelessly promoting themselves by mass distributing press statements and publicity photos.  Schaffer  and  Wice  obviously intended to milk the case for all the news coverage they could get  for two self-serving reasons: to poison the well of public opinion against Paxton  and to generate free advertising to attract future clients. Neither motive is ethical for a special prosecutor. Yet   Wice  has conceded that pretrial media coverage “impacts the way potential jurors view our client’s case long before they are ushered into the courtroom for voir dire. Being able to effectively represent your client on the courthouse steps can be every bit as important as representing them inside the courtroom.”
Moreover   Wice  once cynically acknowledged the economic benefits of making media appearances  informing fellow lawyers that “appearing on TV is client development — free advertising — that might well yield future business. And you never can tell what that one local  or  with a bit of good fortune  national TV appearance  can do for you or your practice.” Exploiting the media  in other words  is the latest form of ambulance chasing. “Celebrity” attorneys  like the Kardashians  are famous for being famous.
In that vein  Schaffer and Wice continued a steady stream of self-aggrandizing communications with the press corps during the “investigation” and grand jury phases  despite the strict secrecy associated with the grand jury process. The special prosecutors had numerous communications (by email and telephone) with the New York Times’ reporter early in the case  following which the NYT reported Paxton’s indictment on August 1  2015  before the indictment was even unsealed. Was this national media scoop a coincidence? The special prosecutors were the obvious source of the highly-unprofessional leak  but the press corps gratefully reciprocated by uncritically reporting  Wice ’s spin as “news.”
In addition to regularly sending eager reporters status updates and copies of pleadings and orders  on at least two occasions  Wice  circulated to the media Paxton’s annual Personal Financial Statement  presumably to encourage reporters to scrutinize the donors to Paxton’s legal defense fund — a wholly improper purpose. In an even more egregious breach of propriety   Wice  emailed a copy of Paxton’s booking “mugshot” to his KPRC colleague  reporter Phil Archer  shortly after Paxton was released on bail. The only word to describe this type of conduct is “sleazy.”
Intemperately denouncing Paxton’s legal arguments as “frivolous” and “clearly baseless ” the special prosecutors’ tone toward Paxton dripped with contempt as they delivered sound bites to groveling reporters on deadline. When asked by a reporter about a new attorney joining the Paxton defense team to deal with the federal civil case (which was ultimately dismissed with prejudice)   Schaffer  sarcastically responded “Never heard of him. Looks like we set off the Lawyer Relief Act…” When a prominent Paxton supporter wrote an op-ed in the Midland Reporter-Telegram  criticizing the indictment  the thin-skinned prosecutors immediately issued a florid press statement — presumably on the taxpayers’ nickel — condemning the piece as a “rant” containing “lies bathed in the cologne of half-truths  fabrications and disinformation.”
Mimicking the prosecutors’ flippant and unprofessional tone  some reporters began running stories with shockingly-unbalanced headlines  such as “Another Day  Another Idiotic Ken Paxton Motion ” which  Schaffer  and Wice gleefully circulated to their media contacts  with the message “I love it.” If media outlets did not parrot the prosecutors’ swaggering narrative  they were cut off from “insider access.”
This incestuous arrangement likely explains why the Dallas Morning News  which was closely following the Paxton case  never reported the bombshell mentioned in Part 2 — that  Schaffer  was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in a federal RICO case against the leader of the Bandidos motorcycle gang — a revelation that would have greatly tarnished the special prosecutors’ undeserved Boy Scout image — which McGaughy had gone to extraordinary lengths to burnish.
This apparently referred to Paxton’s retention of a defense team that included Dan Cogdell and Philip Hilder  with respect to whom  Schaffer  and Wice issued polite public statements.
The hundreds of email exchanges between the prosecutors and reporters (McGaughy in particular) are clearly collusive. With the avid cooperation of the press corps  for two and a half years  Schaffer  and Wice have been busy smearing Paxton through leaks and planted stories  all while risibly claiming to be “seeking justice on behalf of the people of Texas.”
To re-cap this series: The baseless  politicized prosecution of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has been a travesty on many levels. Following the recusal of Collin County District Attorney Greg Willis  the matter should not have been referred to mercenary “special prosecutors” for investigation;  Schaffer  (the unindicted co-conspirator in a RICO case) and Wice (an incorrigible diva) were not suitable for the assignment in any event; the open-ended compensation arrangement agreed to by Judge Scott Becker was both unlawful and foolhardy; the grand jury indictment improperly obtained by the unscrupulous prosecutors amounts to fabricated felonies — made-up crimes never previously prosecuted in a Texas court; the overtly-biased George Gallagher presided over the case as a farcical kangaroo court; changing the venue of the case to Harris County was an absurd and outrageous denial of due process to Paxton; et cetera  ad infinitum.
[A]: no


[Q]: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Justin Townes Earle is Neutral . Justin Townes Earle  has a habit of doing things on  his  own terms. Last year   he  broke with convention in leaving Nashville for Omaha  Nebraska to cut  his  latest LP  the acclaimed Kids in the Street. This spring   he 's hitting the road for a fresh  34-date tour  which  he 'll be conducting all on  his  own in a solo acoustic format.
Related Hear Justin Townes Earle  Chris Shiflett Talk Addiction  Nirvana Singer discusses  his  new album 'Kids in the Street' and old Nashville on Shiflett's 'Walking the Floor' podcast
 Earle  frequently performs by  himself   but the news is a break in its own way given that Kids in the Street was one of  his  most fleshed-out records  one that thrived on its full-band arrangements. The Music City native will nonetheless be right at home  considering  he 'll be playing the sorts of theaters and small clubs where  he 's most comfortable.
 He  begins  his  trek at Pitchfork Social in Salt Spring Island  British Columbia on May 6th and wraps things up six weeks later at the Crocodile in Seattle  Washington. Those two gigs are only 100 miles away from each other  but in between  Earle  loops around the country  hitting cities like St. Paul  Minnesota  Brooklyn  New York  and Austin  Texas before returning to the west coast.
The full list of Justin Townes Earle's spring tour dates:
[A]:
no