In this task, you will be presented with a context passage, a question about that paragraph, and a possible answer to that question. The task is to check the validity of the answer. Answer with "Yes" or "No".

Input: Consider Input: The movie is a powerful story that deals with feminism and patriarchy in the middle class of India . It is shot in the present and past tense showing lives of the characters Mahender and Sudha as they lived together as well as separately . The movie starts with Mahender getting down at the railway station and making his way to the waiting room just as it starts to rain heavily . A woman , Sudha , is already sitting in the waiting room . On seeing him , she tries to hide her face from him but later they confront each other . Mahender has an accomplished business dealing with photography . He respects his grandfather immensely . Incidentally , he had been engaged to Sudha for 5 years but always made some excuse to delay their wedding . However , this time his grandfather has fixed the wedding on the first week of the following month . He reveals to Sudha that he is having an affair with one of the most radical representations of feminism in a girl called Maya . He returns to tell Maya , but Maya has disappeared , leaving him some poetry . Mahender then marries Sudha and is quite happy , but the sudden return of Maya causes tensions in their married life . Mahender frequently tells Sudha about all the beautifully poignant , loving and authentic things Maya did over the years that they lived together . Later , Maya tries to commit suicide , and this leads to Mahender spending time with her over a few weeks . Sudha , not knowing about Maya 's suicide attempt and therefore believing that Mahender is being unfaithful to her , feels that her marriage was a mistake , and questions Mahender about his intentions . <sep>Who tries to hide her face?<sep>The photographer

Output: No


Input: Consider Input: Adrienne Saunders is happily married to her art dealer husband , Jack . They have a daughter named Mary . Adrienne hears from a friend that she thought she saw Jack in town when he claimed to be on an out of town business trip . Adrienne confronts him , but he denies being in town , and their lives continue . Soon after a museum curator is mysteriously murdered , and a relic that Jack bought for the museum is revealed to be a fake . Jack is placed under suspicion , and then Adrienne receives word from the police that Jack perished in a car accident . In trying to wrap up Jack 's affairs , Adrienne begins to suspect that her husband had switched identities with a high school classmate , Frank Sullivan . When she sees a high school yearbook picture of her husband attributed to Sullivan , she is convinced . She tracks down a relative of Saunders , who confirms that Frank and Jack were inseparable in high school . After Jack died , the relative never saw Frank again . She explained that Frank 's father was an alcoholic and that his mother worked as a toll booth operator . She directs Adrienne to Frank 's mother , who lives in a rundown apartment in Brooklyn . Frank 's mother bitterly receives the news that she has a granddaughter , telling Adrienne that Frank was always selfish and that he never looked in on her . A stalker lurks at Adrienne 's loft . He comes in to Adrienne 's bed while she is asleep and caresses her . He watches Mary , who is spooked by the man in her room at night . <sep>What happened to Jack?<sep>Jack is in car accident

Output: Yes


Input: Consider Input: Low-income domestic violence victims may find long-term legal help -- representation in divorces or child-custody disputes -- hard to come by, if two organizations now providing such help can't replace their lost funding. The Legal Aid Society of Salt Lake and Utah Legal Services are already facing cutbacks after they were refused a federal grant of more than $450,000 in September. The board overseeing the state Office of Crime Victim Reparations [CVR] has voted to deny a stopgap funding request from the two organizations. While describing the request as a worthy cause, board members agreed Tuesday that funding divorces or custody disputes was outside their focus -- providing direct services for crime victims. The $175,000 requested would have allowed the legal aid groups to maintain a skeleton staff to continue providing help beyond emergency protective orders for victims, completing existing cases and offering services in limited cases. The groups also plan to enlist more pro bono attorneys through coordination with the Utah State Bar. "We don't have a lot more options," said Anne Milne, executive director of Utah Legal Services, after learning of the CVR refusal Wednesday. The organization has already lost some staff through attrition and has turned away some cases, she said. Milne said she may ask the board overseeing her organization to give her until November to seek funding from additional sources. Without additional funding, the outlook for longer-term legal help is unclear. For two years, the groups had received 18-month civil legal assistance grants from the U.S. Department of Justice and had used them to provide such assistance. But last month, a third request was denied. Funding used to help victims obtain emergency protective orders remains in place, said Milne and Stewart Ralphs, executive director of the Legal Aid Society of Salt Lake. Although an order's requirements that an abuser stay away from a victim may remain in effect for years, protective orders only settle issues such as child custody, child support, custody and property arrangements for 150 days. Many judges are reluctant to address those issues in emergency protective orders, since the decrees stay in effect for such a short time, Milne and Ralphs said. "The likelihood a victim will return to her abuser increases if she cannot permanently sever the relationship and establish workable support, custody and property arrangements," the funding request to CVR said. The Department of Justice said it denied the grant application, in part, because evaluators did not see enough collaboration between the organizations and victims' advocates, Ralphs and Milne told CVR board members. While the two said they believe their organizations coordinate well, the organizations cannot appeal the grant denial. Although CVR board members considered giving the money as a loan, not a grant, their vote on the funding request -- taken after Milne and Ralphs left the meeting -- was unanimous. <sep>The two organizations who made a stopgap funding request asked for how much money?<sep>$175,000


Output: Yes


