In this task, you're given passages that contain mentions of names of people, places, or things. Some of these mentions refer to the same person, place, or thing. Your job is to write questions that evaluate one's understanding of such references. Good questions are expected to link pronouns (she, her, him, his, their, etc.) or other mentions to people, places, or things to which they may refer. Do not ask questions that can be answered correctly without understanding the paragraph or having multiple answers. Avoid questions that do not link phrases referring to the same entity. For each of your questions, the answer should be one or more phrases in the paragraph, and it should be unambiguous.

Q: Passage: Novelist Geoff and his wife Sally rent an isolated countryside bungalow to enable Geoff to finish his latest book without the distractions of life in London. On their arrival, they are horrified to find a dead man in the property; before they can report the discovery they are confronted by Duke, a gangland boss, and his henchmen who have, it transpires, been using the empty property as a hide-out for stolen valuables which they are planning to smuggle out of the country. A rival gangster, Juan, also has his eye on the goods and has discovered their whereabouts. The dead man is one of his minions.
Geoff and Sally are held captive, and matters take a turn for the worse when Juan and his men also arrive on the scene, forcing a stand-off between the two factions during which Geoff and Sally are roughly-treated by both sides. Duke starts to fall for Sally, and his obvious interest in her antagonises his girlfriend Rina. Eventually there is a bloody shoot-out between the rival gangs, with Duke's men getting the better of the exchange. Duke boards a plane to make good his escape with the valuables, but the plane is shot down by the jealous and vengeful Rina.

A: Who worked for Juan?
****
Q: Passage: In the years following the eruption, despite earning rapid fame and opportunities to research internationally in Japan, New Zealand, and Guadeloupe, Glicken still failed to obtain a job at USGS. Senior employees at the Survey found his behavioral oddities unsettling. Activity at Mount St. Helens diminished, prompting USGS to reduce CVO's budget and contemplate closing the station. He continued helping the Survey until 1989, also serving as an assistant researcher at the University of California at Santa Barbara.From 1989 to 1991, Glicken continued his volcanological studies in Japan as a postdoctoral fellow at the Earthquake Research Institute of the University of Tokyo, supported by grants from the U.S. National Science Foundation. Later, while a research professor and translator at Tokyo Metropolitan University, Glicken became involved with research at Mount Unzen. The volcano had recently resumed eruptive activity in November 1990, after being dormant for 198 years. In the months after its first activity, it erupted sporadically, and the government evacuated its vicinity near the end of May 1991. On June 2, 1991, Glicken visited the mountain with Katia and Maurice Krafft. The three entered a danger zone near the base of the volcano the following day, assuming that any potentially hazardous pyroclastic flows would follow a turn in the landscape and safely bypass them. Later that day, a lava dome collapsed, sending a large flow down the valley at 60 miles per hour (97 km/h). The current reached the turn before separating into two parts, and the upper, hotter part swiftly overcame the volcanologists' post, killing them upon impact. In total, 41 or 42 people died in the incident, including press members who had been watching the volcanologists. The volcano burned down 390 houses, and the remains of the flow extended 2.5 miles (4 km) in length. Glicken's remains were found four days later, and were cremated according to his parents' wishes. To date, Glicken and Johnston are the only American volcanologists known to have been killed by a volcanic eruption.

A: What is the last name of the American volcanologist that has died along with the man continued his volcanological studies in Japan?
****
Q: Passage: In Sweden, juries are uncommon; the public is represented in the courts by means of lay judges (namndeman). However, the defendant has the right to a jury trial in the lower court (tingsratt) when accused of an offense against the fundamental laws on freedom of expression and freedom of the press. If a person is accused of e.g. libel or incitement to ethnic or racial hatred, in a medium covered by the fundamental laws (e.g. a printed paper or a radio programme), she has the right to have the accusation tried by a jury of nine jurors. This applies also in civil (tort) cases under the fundamental laws. A majority of at least six jurors must find that the defendant has committed the alleged crime. If it does not, the defendant is acquitted or, in a civil case, held not liable. If such a majority of the jurors hold that said crime has in fact been committed, this finding is not legally binding for the court; thus, the court (three judges) can still acquit the defendant or find him/her not liable. A jury acquittal may not be overruled after appeal. In Swedish civil process, the "English rule" applies to court costs. Earlier, a court disagreeing with a jury acquittal could, when deciding on the matter of such costs, set aside the English rule, and instead use the American rule, that each party bears its own expense of litigation. This practice was declared to violate the rule of presumption of innocence according to article 6.2. of the European Convention on Human Rights, by the Supreme Court of Sweden, in 2012.

A:
Who has the right to have the accusation tried by a jury of nine jurors?
****