the issue of “the full extent of when knowledge possessed by an arm of the State will be imputed to the prosecution.” Id. As the government admits, Pretrial Services has a statutory duty to report any violation of pretrial release conditions to both the court and the United States attorney. See 18 U.S.C. § 3154(5). Further, the Supreme Court has interpreted Brady broadly, in order to provide an incentive for the government to initiate “procedures and regulations” to carry the prosecutor’s “duty to learn of any favorable evidence known to the others acting on the government’s behalf in the case, including the police.” Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419, 437-38, 115 S.Ct. 1555, 131 L.Ed.2d 490 (1995) (emphasis added); see also United States v. Brooks, 966 F.2d 1500, 1500-04 (D.C.Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>) (internal quotation marks omitted). In this
holding that an individual prosecutor has a duty to learn of any favorable evidence known to the others acting on the governments behalf in the case including the police holding that prosecutions duty to learn of brady material extends to the files of the police departments homicide and internal affairs divisions observing the cases finding a duty to search have involved files maintained by branches of government closely aligned with the prosecution  and in each case the court has found  bureaucratic boundaries too weak to limit the duty holding the duty to indemnify is narrower than the duty to defend holding that the duty of good faith and fair dealing is a contractual duty holding that the court has no duty to search for triable issues