sel . ▁ ▁In ▁a ▁conc urr ing ▁decision , ▁B inn ie ▁J ▁disag re ed ▁with ▁the ▁majority ' s ▁analysis ▁of ▁the ▁definition ▁of ▁det ention ▁but ▁agreed ▁that ▁Mr . ▁Grant ▁was ▁det ained ▁before ▁he ▁inc rimin ated ▁himself , ▁in fr ing ing ▁his ▁Char ter ▁rights . ▁In ▁a ▁second ▁conc urr ing ▁decision , ▁D esch amps ▁J ▁also ▁agreed ▁that ▁Mr . ▁Grant ▁was ▁det ained ▁prior ▁to ▁inc rimin ating ▁himself . ▁ ▁Section ▁ 2 4 ( 2 ) ▁Once ▁a ▁viol ation ▁was ▁found , ▁the ▁case ▁turned ▁on ▁the ▁application ▁of ▁section ▁ 2 4 ( 2 ), ▁which ▁states ▁that ▁once ▁a ▁viol ation ▁of ▁an ▁individual ' s ▁Char ter ▁rights ▁have ▁been ▁found , ▁the ▁evidence ▁obtained ▁through ▁the ▁viol ation ▁must ▁be ▁ex cluded ▁if ▁its ▁inclusion ▁would ▁bring ▁the ▁administration ▁of ▁justice ▁into ▁dis re put e . ▁ ▁The ▁majority ▁found ▁that ▁the ▁analyt ical ▁framework ▁found ▁in ▁the ▁prior ▁leading ▁cases ▁of ▁R ▁v ▁Collins ▁and ▁R ▁v ▁Still man ▁had ▁created ▁just ifiable ▁critic isms , ▁and ▁the ▁majority ▁set ▁out ▁a ▁re vised ▁test , ▁consisting ▁of ▁three ▁parts : ▁ ▁Ser ious ness ▁of ▁the ▁Char ter - In fr ing ing ▁State ▁Con duct , ▁which ▁requires ▁an ▁assess ment ▁of ▁ ▁whether ▁the ▁ad mission ▁of ▁the ▁evidence ▁would ▁bring ▁the ▁administration ▁of ▁justice ▁into ▁dis re put e , ▁and ▁focus es ▁on ▁the ▁sever ity ▁of