Given the document below, determine if the summary is factually consistent with the document. A summary is factually consistent if no facts in the summary reflect the negation of a fact in the document.

Document: NAME_1, 58, also seriously injured two other motorists in the crash of the A421 Bedford bypass on 12 January 2016. A web cam in his cab showed the brake lights ahead for 17 seconds before the collision. NAME_2 admitted two counts of causing death by dangerous driving. He also pleaded guilty to two charges of causing serious injury by dangerous driving. A collision report said NAME_2 had not reacted or braked at all, and the court heard the cause of his inattention remained a mystery. He was not using a mobile phone, was not tired or ill, and had driven about two million miles over the previous years without incident. NAME_3, prosecuting, told Luton Crown Court the couple who died were grandparents NAME_4, 70 and his wife NAME_5, 68, of Buckden, Cambridgeshire. NAME_6, 54, from Bedford sustained serious injuries and had to be cut free from

Summary: 1. A webcam in her cabin showed the brake lights lights in front of her for 17 seconds before the collision.

Is the summary factually consistent with the document with respect to facts?
Options: "Yes" or "No"

Answer:


 Please repeat the request first, then give your response.
user