In State v. Okumura, 78 Hawai'i 383, 392, 894 P.2d 80, 89 (1995), during a videotaped police interview, Okumura offered to implicate a police officer in the burglaries with which Okumura was being charged. 78 Hawai'i at 390, 894 P.2d at 87 The videotape was not turned over to Okumura, and a detective said the videotape was inaudible and had been thrown away. Id. at 390-91, 894 P.2d at 87-88. The court stated that "because the videotape is no longer available, whether the evidence would be exculpatory cannot be conclusively established." Id. at 402, 894 P.2d at 99. The court went on to state that Okumura could still show his right to due process was violated if he could establish the State acted in bad faith; however, Okumura failed to do so. Id. The defendant claimed that the prosecution had violated its discovery obligations by failing to disclose the results of a polygraph examination taken by a prosecution witness. The Hawai'i Supreme Court concluded that because the polygraph results were not admissible, they could not have been material to the preparation of the defense. Id. at 397, 894 P.2d at 94. Accordingly, the court held that the prosecution did not breach its discovery obligations in failing to disclose the polygraph results. Id. at 397-98, 894 P.2d at 94-95.