Given a paragraph about movies and a set of conversational questions and answers about the paragraph, say whether the passage contains sufficient information to answer the follow-up question. Say Yes if it is answerable; otherwise, say No. The paragraph has the prefix 'CONTEXT:'. Each conversation question has a prefix `Q:` followed by the answer prefix `A:`, and the follow-up question has a prefix `FOLLOWUP_Q:`.

[EX Q]: CONTEXT: We don't know. All we know is that Chiron assaulted him with the chair. Certainly he was injured but we don't know the severity of the injuries. Given that Chiron is only sent to juvie it's extremely unlikely that Terrel was killed. Thus a charge of the Assault variety would seem likely but that is also unknown. We also don't know how long Chiron was in juvie but most age out of the juvenile system at 18, assuming he was tried as a minor. However, there is a 10 year time jump between the assault and when we see Chiron again so any sentence would have been less than that since Chiron has now relocated to another city, is considerably larger than before and is now established as a drug dealer.  <sep>  Q: What happened to Terrel?
[EX A]: Yes

[EX Q]: CONTEXT: It's a figure of speech, sometimes when people speak, they refer themselves in third person perspective. Could be various reasons. In some cultures, people usually address themselves in third person perspective because they believe that addressing themselves in first person is not good. This incident is called Illeism (from Latin ille meaning "he, that") which is the act of referring to oneself in the third person instead of first person. Illeism is sometimes used in literature as a stylistic device. In real life usage, illeism can reflect a number of different stylistic intentions or involuntary circumstances. In this matter, Sparrow refers herself in third person because she needs to give the herself lofty airs, to puff herself up or illustrate her egoism.  <sep>  Q: Why does Golden Sparrow always use "she" instead of "I" or "My"? A: This incident is called Illeism (from Latin ille meaning "he, that") which is the act of referring to oneself in the third person instead of first person  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Is Golden Sparrow a single lady?
[EX A]: No

[EX Q]: CONTEXT: He wants to destroy the symbol of the revolution. Think back to the end of the first film. Katniss saves Peeta's life by threatening to eat the poisonous berries, and thus kill them both. In doing so she forces the government's hand, making Snow look weak. Katniss then has to pretend to love Peeta, and this love is shown to the public. Snow even taunts her with it, knowing the love is false. But he doesn't reveal it publicly, because he knows he can use it against her. Katniss then becomes the face of the revolution. By showing Peeta switching sides, and by having him be the one to kill Katniss, Snow will regain his lost power. He will once again appear to be the man in charge. Part of this comes from the Quarter Quell, where Katniss (to the public at least) apparently abandons Peeta. It's also a massive personal and demoralising blow against Katniss. Even if Peeta fails, Snow hopes to break Katniss' spirit, and in doing so destroy her, and the revolution with it. He fails, because he doesn't count on Katniss actually coming to love Peeta.  <sep>  Q: Which rescue team saves them?
[EX A]:
Yes