Brady demands more. See, e.g., United States v. Charles, No. 10-CR-37, 2011 WL 2689353, at *5 (D.V.I. July 11, 2011) (“Given the highly speculative nature of [the defendant's] latest theory of the case . . . and the failure to identify any particular evidence in the possession of the government that supports his theory, the Court declines to find a Brady violation.”).
However, nondisclosure will not support a Brady violation if the suppressed information is not favorable to the defendant and material to the proceedings. See United States v. Charles, Crim. No. 10-cr-0037, 2011 WL 2689353, *5 (D.V.I. July 11, 2011) (citing Maynard v. Gov't of V.I., No. 09-2273, 2010 WL 3330193, *8 (3d Cir. Aug. 25, 2010) ("[N]on-disclosure alone is not sufficient to form the basis of a successful Brady challenge."). On the issue of materiality, the Supreme Court has noted that "[s]uch evidence is material 'if there is a reasonable probability that, had the evidence been disclosed to the defense, the result of the proceeding would have been different.'"