Input: Mr. Neville ( ( ( Anthony Higgins , a young and arrogant artist and something of a Byronic hero , is contracted to produce a series of 12 landscape drawings of an estate by Mrs. Virginia Herbert for her absent and estranged husband . Part of the contract is that Mrs. Herbert agrees '' to meet Mr. Neville in private and to comply with his requests concerning his pleasure with me . '' Several sexual encounters between them follow , each of them acted in such a way as to emphasise reluctance or distress on the part of Mrs Herbert and sexual aggression or insensitivity on the part of Mr Neville . Meanwhile , whilst living on the estate , Mr. Neville gains quite a reputation with its dwellers , especially with Mrs. Herbert's son-in-law , Mr. Talmann . Mrs. Herbert , wearied of meeting Mr. Neville for his pleasure , tries to terminate the contract before all of the drawings are completed and orders Mr. Neville to stop . But he refuses to void the contract and continues as before . Then Mrs. Herbert's married , but as yet childless , daughter , Mrs. Talmann , who has apparently become attracted to Mr. Neville , seems to blackmail him into making a second contract in Which he agrees to comply with what is described as her pleasure , rather than his a reversal of the position in regard to her mother . A number of curious objects appear in Neville's drawings , Which point ultimately to the murder of Mr. Herbert , whose body is discovered in the moat of the house . Mr. Neville completes his twelve drawings and leaves the house .

Does the response "Mr. Smith and Mrs Williams" correctly answer the question "Who has several sexual encounters?"?

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
***
Output: no

The second major point on which the principals had agreed on March 10 was the need to crack down on terrorist organizations and curtail their fund-raising. The embassy bombings of 1998 had focused attention on al Qaeda's finances. One result had been the creation of an NSC-led interagency committee on terrorist financing. On its recommendation, the President had designated Bin Laden and al Qaeda as subject to sanctions under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. This gave theTreasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) the ability to search for and freeze any Bin Laden or al Qaeda assets that reached the U.S. financial system. But since OFAC had little information to go on, few funds were frozen. In July 1999, the President applied the same designation to the Taliban for harboring Bin Laden. Here, OFAC had more success. It blocked more than $34 million in Taliban assets held in U.S. banks. Another $215 million in gold and $2 million in demand deposits, all belonging to the Afghan central bank and held by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, were also frozen. After October 1999, when the State Department formally designated al Qaeda a "foreign terrorist organization," it became the duty of U.S. banks to block its transactions and seize its funds. Neither this designation nor UN sanctions had much additional practical effect; the sanctions were easily circumvented, and there were no multilateral mechanisms to ensure that other countries' financial systems were not used as conduits for terrorist funding. Attacking the funds of an institution, even the Taliban, was easier than finding and seizing the funds of a clandestine worldwide organization like al Qaeda. Although the CIA's Bin Laden unit had originally been inspired by the idea of studying terrorist financial links, few personnel assigned to it had any experience in financial investigations. Any terrorist-financing intelligence appeared to have been collected collaterally, as a consequence of gathering other intelligence. This attitude may have stemmed in large part from the chief of this unit, who did not believe that simply following the money from point A to point B revealed much about the terrorists' plans and intentions. As a result, the CIA placed little emphasis on terrorist financing. Nevertheless, the CIA obtained a general understanding of how al Qaeda raised money.

Question: "What are two reasons the CIA placed little emphasis on terrorist financing?"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer: "The chief of the CIA's Bin Laden unit did not believe that tracing money from point A to point B revealed much about the terrorists' plans and intentions, and few personnel assigned to the unit had any experience in financial investigations"

Response: yes

"The impact of her interest and work on the provision of legal services in the state of California is immeasurable," said Patricia Philips, senior of-counsel for Los Angeles' Morrison & Foerster. "Its value is felt every day by someone who would otherwise be floundering around in the legal system yet dealing with very serious problems." Zelon's public-interest work has not gone unnoticed. Several organizations that share her commitment to public service - including the National Legal Aid & Defender Association and the State Bar of California - have honored her. Two years ago, Zelon received the Laurie D. Zelon Pro Bono Award, which had been named for her one year earlier by the Law Firm Pro Bono Project, which she'd helped found. "I didn't find out until I was standing in the great hall of the Supreme Court, surrounded by 300 people who were there, that the award had been named for me and was thereafter going to be given in my name. It's very hard to believe, for anyone who knows me well, but I was actually speechless for a period," Zelon said. Zelon faced one of the greatest challenges of her legal career, she said, when her appointment to the bench forced her to switch gears from civil litigation to criminal law. "It was a steep learning curve for me," she said. "It's a whole different set of processes. The rules are different. The case law is a whole body unto itself." Attorneys praise Zelon for her thorough understanding of the law. "She's extremely well-versed in the law," Leon said. "She's very thorough in her research," Wong said. Of course, not all attorneys concur with every decision Zelon makes in court. Some city attorneys disagree with her interpretation of evidentiary statutes when Zelon puts limits on their use of hearsay testimony. But lawyers who have appeared before her say that they appreciate her intelligent interpretation of the law.

Question: "How did Patricia Philips' work and interest make an impact on the provision of legal services in the state of California?"

Response: "She received the Laurie D. Zelon Pro Bono Award"
OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

A:
no