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:'.

Q: CONTEXT: I've re-watched the scene and noticed that I missed an important detail. As I mentioned in my question, Tata seems to be emotionless during the short interaction itself, but when it ends we can see her coming back to her sit. After sitting, she gives Murphy (now heading to the toilet) a long, angry look. This clearly proves that she knew who she was talking to and that she sarcastically commented the fact that Murphy spent all his time in Germany in the airport. <sep> Q: What did Tata mean when they said "I hope you enjoy germany" A: I've re-watched the scene and noticed that I missed an important detail. As I mentioned in my question, Tata seems to be emotionless during the short interaction itself, but when it ends we can Q: Did she recognize Murphy as a DEA agent? A: After sitting, she gives Murphy (now heading to the toilet) a long, angry look. This clearly proves that she knew who she was talking to and that she sarcastically commented the <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: How did Murphy react?

A: No
****
Q: CONTEXT: Whilst he lay recovering from his wounds his father, who had little regard for him and wanted to ensure his own position of power set to work. He had authority when he was hand which his father took. He had power due to his wild men who had been removed. He had influence over the Gold Cloaks and guard via Bron etc. This had been removed. All of his allies and supporters had been bought by his father or sent away whereas his enemies now enjoyed the protection and power of his sister and nephew. He now has no political authority and no muscle to back his claims. He was also given no credit for what he did in defending the city. Overall he was not so much disgraced as had his status and power taken by Tywin which left him vulnerable. <sep> Q: Why was Tyrion disgraced? A: Overall he was not so much disgraced as had his status and power taken by Tywin which left him vulnerable Q: Do you think Tywin was a good father? A: his father, who had little regard for him Q: Did the The Hand have many duties? A: He had authority when he was hand which his father took <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: what does val ar morghulis mean?

A: No
****
Q: CONTEXT: If I remember correctly, whether Sherlock explained the reason behind him faking his death to John was not shown in the show. It was left for the audience to make an assumption. The way John reacted when he met Sherlock for the first time after that fake incident, we can assume that Sherlock didn't get the time to explain the reason. It can also be assumed that, John realises that it was necessary as he knows Sherlock very well and Sherlock won't go to this extent of faking his own death if there was another way out of the situation. Remember, his only question upon seeing Sherlock (and the reason behind all his anger) was, why he was not informed that Sherlock was still alive. <sep> Q: Did Sherlock explain to John why he faked his death?

A:
Yes
****