Did the prosecution wilfully suppress evidence, i.e., the information about the flight attendants, from the defense?

Question

Defendants were convicted, after a jury trial, of kidnapping and endangering the welfare of a child. Leslie, 13-years-old, testified to being held hostage for a year in the apartment building where her mother, her mother's boyfriend, and her three siblings lived. She testified the kidnappers hid her just two floors her family's apartment. Leslie also said she had a perfectly amicable relationship with the Garcias, had had no prior disputes with them, and considered the Garcias' daughter to be her very best friend. During the entire twelve months that Leslie was held captive, no ransom demands were received. There was evidence that Leslie was physically restrained by defendants and forced onto a plane by Melendez and taken on a flight to Puerto Rico. The prosecutor disclosed only the names of flight attendants, with no contact information or indication as to what information they possessed. These names were buried in a voluminous amount of discovery provided shortly before trial, and were not identified as Brady material. One of the flight attendants, whom the trial prosecutor had personally interviewed, was listed as a potential witness, giving the defense reason to believe that the flight attendant would testify favorably for the prosecution. The prosecutor interviewed the flight attendants and each of them informed the prosecutor prior to trial that no such incident had taken place. Each said that if a 13-year-old child aboard the flight "cried out for help, and physically grabbed one of the flight attendants, each flight attendant responded that if the incident had happened that way, she would have remembered it."
What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

YES