Re Jack Andrew Janczak, 2026 CanLII 12

Re: Jack Andrew Janczak

ORB File No: 8043

Hearing held on: Thursday, December 4, 2025

Place of Hearing: St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, West 5^th Campus

Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code

Before:

Alternate Chairperson: Ms. L. Banks

Members: Dr. M. Attia Dr. P.N. Wright Mr. E. Siebenmorgen Mr. A. Mete

Parties Appearing:

Accused: Jack Andrew Janczak

Counsel: Mr. N. Gregson

The Person in Charge of Hospital: Counsel: Mr. S. O’Brien

Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. J. McKenzie

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION (Dated January 2, 2026)

Introduction

1. On February 11, 2022, Mr. Jack Andrew Janczak was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on two counts of sexual assault, contrary to the Criminal Code. He was most recently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (“ORB” or “the Board”) dated December 12, 2024 pursuant to which he was discharged subject to various conditions, including: a residence condition; reporting to the person in charge of St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, West 5th Campus, or his or her designate, not less than once per month; participating in a program of rehabilitation created by the person in charge; refraining from contact or communication, direct or indirect, with the two victims of the index offences; and upon request of the person in charge or his or her designate, attend for psychiatric assessment. Mr. Janczak has been subject to Conditional Discharge Dispositions since he first came under the Board’s jurisdiction. He was initially followed as an outpatient by the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) and, since January of 2024, by the Forensic Outpatient Service at St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton.

2. On Thursday, December 4, 2025, a panel of the Board convened in person at St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, West 5th Campus (“SJHH” or “the Hospital”) to conduct the annual review of Mr. Janczak’s Disposition. The issues at the hearing were: (a) whether Mr. Janczak represents a significant threat to the safety of the public, as defined in s. 672.5401 of the Criminal Code, and (b) if so, to determine the necessary and appropriate Disposition that is also the least onerous and least restrictive, having regard to the factors in s. 672.54 of the Code. Mr. Janczak was present for his hearing and was represented by his counsel, Mr. Gregson. Mr. Janczak’s mother and stepfather were also present.

Positions of the Parties

3. At the start of the hearing, counsel for the Hospital, supported by counsel for the Attorney General, recommended a Conditional Discharge on the same terms as contained in the existing Disposition. Counsel for Mr. Janczak stated that his instructions were to seek an Absolute Discharge. The parties maintained their respective positions at the conclusion of the evidence.

Evidence for the Hearing

4. The documentary evidence at the hearing consisted of the Hospital Report dated November 13, 2025, a Victim Impact Statement dated November 26, 2024 (also filed at the previous year’s hearing), and a letter addressed to the Board from Bernadette Janczak (Mr. Janczak’s mother) dated December 4, 2024. The oral evidence consisted of the testimony of Dr. K. Shariati, who has been Mr. Janczak’s attending psychiatrist since December of 2023.

Findings

5. For the following Reasons, the panel concluded that it could not affirmatively find that Mr. Janczak continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public. Accordingly, Mr. Janczak was required to be discharged absolutely from the Board’s jurisdiction.

The Index Offences

6. The facts of the index offences are set out in the Hospital Report, which was filed as Exhibit 1 at the hearing. On March 19, 2020, at about 5:00 p.m., a female walking on a street in Mississauga was approached from behind by Mr. Janczak. He grabbed her left buttock with his left hand. The victim swatted his hand away. Mr. Janczak slowly removed his hood, looked at her, and said, “I’m sorry, I’m just hitting on you, I thought you were attractive”. The victim walked away and called police. She was extremely shaken up by the incident.

7. On Friday, March 20, 2020, the victim decided to walk a different route to her bus stop, hoping that she would not see Mr. Janczak again. However, she encountered him a second time, walking westbound toward her. He made eye contact with her and she told him to leave her alone. She then contacted police.

8. On March 20, 2020, at 3:05 p.m., a second victim reported to police that she was approached by Mr. Janczak as she entered a small food market. He stated his name and address and, as she walked away, he said, “Let me feel you up”, reached under her long jacket, and brushed his right hand against her upper thigh, near her genital area. When she protested, he replied “This is how people interact. It’s just a bit of stroking”. She entered the food market and lost sight of Mr. Janczak.

9. Neither victim had known Mr. Janczak prior to the offences. The following information is taken from the account of Mr. Janczak’s self-report of the offences (Hospital Report, p. 14):

Mr. Janczak denied having had thoughts in advance or having a plan to approach or touch the victims. He reported that it was “recent” in his mind that he wanted to date. He denied feeling pent up sexual desire prior to the offences. He stated that on the day of the first and second offence he “was just trying to see if she was interested’”. In regards to the second victim he asserted “there wasn’t really any pent up desire, it just happened that way”. Later during the interview Mr. Janczak endorsed he did not remember what the victims of the offences looked like, but thought they looked like teenagers, guessing they were between 17 or 18 years old.

10. As previously noted, one of the victims prepared an impact statement for Mr. Janczak’s 2024 hearing. Her statement describes the physical and psychological harm that she suffered as a result of the sexual assault, including how the offence can aggravate pre-existing conditions. It is informative to reproduce the relevant portions in these Reasons, as follows:

Emotionally, this incident re-triggered my (previously diagnosed) PTSD, causing me to fall into a severe depression for two years afterwards. I became afraid to go outside and normal activities such as buy groceries, grab coffee, walk my dog, take any form of public transportation, meet up with friends, go to work or the gym, etc. The incident significantly affected my relationship with my (now ex) partner, not only because I felt afraid / incapable of functioning normally in everyday life and society, but also because I became averse to intimacy and completely withdrew from social activities. I struggled with invasive thoughts related to sexual assault, repeated nightmares about sexual assault, and one instance of an auditory hallucination in which I believed that I was hearing a woman screaming for help from a sexual assault. My sleep paralysis disorder came back quite severely as well, which my doctor and my therapist have said can happen with severe stress. I became very distrustful of everyone – particularly men – and frequently had panic attacks and anxiety attacks in public areas. I would often think I saw the accused in public areas and panic. All of this affected my ability to connect with friends, colleagues, family. It took three years of increased mental and physical care to get back to a fairly “normal” state of mind and body.

Physically, my chronic pain worsened after this incident, requiring more physiotherapy, massage, chiropractic care for 3 years afterwards. Overall, my body responded to this incident negatively; I continue to suffer from chronic hives from stress and fear, chronic IBS symptoms, and flare ups of pain in my body.

General Background Information

11. Mr. Janczak’s background, early history, and family observations of his declining mental health situation are detailed in the Hospital Report. A fair summary of this background is contained in paras. 6-9 of last year’s Reasons, several paragraphs are reproduced (with minor modifications noted) as follows:

12. Mr. Janczak is presently 40 years [now41] of age. He has three siblings and maintains his [natural] parents are not his biological parents. His mother left medical school to immigrate to Canada with his father and worked as a registered nurse for 10 years before becoming a naturopathic doctor. His father died when he was aged 23 and his mother later married his paternal uncle. When asked [during his criminal responsibility assessment] when he last had contact with any member of his family, he relates having lived multiple lives and having had contact in previous lives. When asked to clarify his birthday, he said he was born in 1984, but clarified that he had lived before and since that date

13. Mr. Janczak completed high school successfully and graduated with honours from a three-year business and investment program at Sheridan College. He started receiving Ontario Disability Support Program benefits in 2011.

14. He reports that he has had four relationships in the past with women but clarified that the relationships had been in “past lives”, dating back to the beginning of the last century. His mother was unaware of any romantic relationships in which her son has ever been involved. He has stated he is sexually interested in same-aged peers but when asked about sex with minors has indicated it would be acceptable in certain circumstances. When asked to explain his thinking about children, he indicated he would only engage sexually with a child if it “helped” the child as, for example, improving the individual’s self image.

15. Mrs. Janczak has reported that her son’s mental health deteriorated in 2008 while he was living in Alberta. He returned to Ontario in March 2008 at his family’s urging and received outpatient psychiatric care. He was prescribed Olanzapine and returned to his baseline quickly during the six months he was medication compliant, but thereafter experienced mental deterioration when no longer taking the medication. His mental condition deteriorated further with auditory hallucinations and delusional ideation, and he stopped attending appointments and receiving his injections in 2018.

16. It is noted that following his graduation from Sheridan College, Mr. Janczak obtained employment in the insurance industry but grew weary of this work. He moved to Alberta in 2007 and worked in a Sears store before returning to Ontario in 2008 as noted above. He has not been employed since then.

Psychiatric History

13. Mr. Janczak’s psychiatric history, including his inpatient and outpatient course before and after the index offences, is detailed in the Hospital Report which is in evidence at the hearing. For the purpose of these Reasons, only certain features are highlighted to provide necessary context for the panel’s analysis of the “significant threat” issue.

14. Mr. Janczak’s first psychiatric admission was in October of 2009, when he was brought to hospital by the Crisis Outreach and Support Team (COAST) after his mother reported bizarre behaviour on his part, including wanting to burn his father, who had earlier been diagnosed with cancer. He was prescribed medication and reportedly improved for several months following his discharge. From April to May of 2011, he was admitted to hospital for approximately six weeks after assaulting his terminally ill father by punching him in the stomach. He had reportedly been demonstrating symptoms of psychosis for some time and had become socially withdrawn.

15. Trillium Health Partners’ records indicate that Mr. Janczak received outpatient care from Dr. S. Johnson and the Credit Valley Hospital Outpatient services from 2011 until March 2018. However, the details of his course under Dr. Johnson’s care are not available. Mr. Janczak’s mother, however, reported that in the years prior to 2019, when her son was treated as an outpatient, he deteriorated further, hearing voices and becoming increasingly more delusional. He started isolating from his siblings, sometimes accusing Mrs. Janczak of not being his mother. He also continued struggling with sleep. Mr. Janczak moved out of his family’s home and into a condominium owned by his family near their home about five years prior to the NCR assessment. Mrs. Janczak noted that towards the end of 2018, her son had deteriorated further and his relationship with his outpatient psychiatrist became strained. She opined that the psychiatrist had been too focused on Mr. Janczak returning to work and Mr. Janczak did not respond well to this. He stopped attending appointments and getting his injection.

16. Mr. Janczak was admitted involuntarily to hospital from January 13 to March 1 of 2019 after assaulting his mother and stepfather who were trying to help clean up his apartment. During the admission, Mr. Janczak acknowledged that he had stopped taking medication (Risperidone Consta 38.5mg every two weeks) in March of 2018 because he had “figured out the genetic code” and no longer needed them. Upon discharge, he was connected with Trillium Health outpatient mental health services. The Hospital Report indicates that while Mr. Janczak attended appointments, he was inconsistent with his medication adherence and continued to exhibit symptoms of his mental illness (he had by this time been consistently diagnosed with schizophrenia).

17. Following a brief attendance at the Emergency Department in February of 2020 after reporting to police waking up with an 11-year-old child in his mattress, Mr. Janczak had his first appointment with Dr. L. Slade at the Trillium Health Outpatient Ambulatory Mental Health Program. He attended with his mother.

18. Mr. Janczak’s next appointment with Dr. Slade was on March 19, 2020 (the date of the first index offence). His presentation was noted to be much improved from the previous month, although Mr. Janczak stated that he was not taking his prescribed oral medication. He reported leaving the house more often, going out for walks to take breaks, said that his mood was good and denied any symptoms suggestive of depression.

19. Mr. Janczak continued to see Dr. Slade regularly following his arrest for the index offences. He continued attending at her clinic for his long-acting injections. He was initially variably compliant with his oral medication but became more consistent in this in the years 2021 and 2022. Dr. Slade opined, when reflecting about Mr. Janczak’s decompensation around the time of the index offences, that a significant destabilizing factor beyond non-adherence to medication was a change in his routine, particularly his mother going away around the time of the offences. She described Mr. Janczak as someone who is sensitive to disruptions in his day-to-day routines, and that he may need increased supports in periods of transition.

20. During Mr. Janczak’s initial year under the Board, he was followed by the Forensic Outpatient Service (FOPS) at CAMH and continued to receive his medication through Dr. Slade. He continued to live alone in his apartment in Mississauga and his mother visited him frequently, also assisting him with all his appointments. His mother moved to Brantford in June of 2023 and Mr. Janczak moved in with her, prompting a transfer of his forensic outpatient care to SJHH.

21. During his first full year of living with his parents in Brantford and his 2024 reporting year while being followed by SJHH outpatient staff and Dr. Shariati, it was noted that his residual symptoms, including that “engineers” were at work in his brain, were less preoccupying for Mr. Janczak. The Hospital Report notes that, “The reduction of the presence of ‘engineers’ coincides with an increase in activity such as working on projects in the yard with his brother. He frequently tends to the yard by himself and does a lot in the home according to Ms. Janczak. As of July 2024, he wanted to focus less on activities and his programing books, while resting and focusing on himself more. He reported that because of experiencing fewer perceptual disturbances, he has been able to engage in other activities.”

22. Mr. Janczak’s sexual health and thoughts were discussed with him during the 2024 reporting year. The Hospital Report includes the following self-report in this regard:

He reported that he has "good" sexual health because of going through the process following the commission of the index offences, and through the conversations he has had about this with others. He indicated that many nurses, social work, and Dr. Slade have helped him be a “different person” when it comes to behaviours like the index offences. He reported that he is "a lot less likely to have the thought of doing something like that. I don't think about touching a girl without knowing her first".

23. Mr. Janczak is diagnosed with schizophrenia. He is considered capable of making decisions in relation to his treatment and his finances.

Evidence at the Hearing

24. Dr. Shariati testified that Mr. Janczak has had a very good reporting year, having experienced improvements in the symptoms of his illness (less distressing), no substance use or cravings for the same, maintaining his appointments with his community psychiatrist, and having increased his capacity for social interaction with family members. Dr. Shariati testified that he has met with Mr. Janczak three or four times over the past reporting year. In addition, Mr. Janczak has been seen monthly by Dr. Slade, and every two weeks by his forensic case manager.

25. Dr. Shariati described Mr. Janczak’s risk as low, stating that it has lowered since the index offences, due in part to the following:

• no changes to his living environment;

• living with his mother;

• continued compliance with his medications;

• a positive relationship with his community psychiatrist, Dr. Slade, who is the primary prescriber of his medications; and

• the significant impact, in terms of personal deterrence, of the process of his arrest and going to court.

26. Dr. Shariati stated that Mr. Janczak is quite reliant upon his family for his ongoing stability. He lives in quite a “small world” in which he keeps to himself for the most part. Dr. Shariati recommended that Mr. Janczak continue with the development of social skills so that he can interact with others in the community. Dr. Shariati opined that as of the time of the hearing, there did not seem to be a foreseeable scenario of wider community interaction in Mr. Janczak’s case. Asked by a panel member to elaborate on the kinds of social skills that he would like to see Mr. Janczak developing, Dr. Shariati answered that it would have to do with dating, romantic interests and how to pursue them while respecting appropriate boundaries. Mr. Janczak has not had assistance to this effect, though it has been suggested to him by Dr. Shariati, by Dr. Slade, and by the forensic case manager. Mr. Janczak has become very avoidant to the subject of dating, owing to the deterrent impact of becoming subject to the legal and forensic process. He has simply withdrawn.

27. Responding to questions from another panel member, Dr. Shariati stated that the index offences occurred due to both psychotic delusions and the absence of social skills, with the psychosis actually pushing Mr. Janczak to take the actions that he did.

28. With respect to Mr. Janczak’s schizophrenia, Dr. Shariati confirmed that he remains symptomatic. The forensic case manager developed a system of self-rating to assist Mr. Janczak in articulating the extent to which his delusional thinking caused him distress over the past reporting year. Dr. Shariati’s review of this caused him to conclude that the current situation may be “as good as it’s going to be”. While Mr. Janczak’s delusions appear to be fixed, they are seen as conceptual and he has not acted upon them. Over the past reporting period, he has not been seen responding to internal stimuli.

29. In response to panel members’ questions, Dr. Shariati stated that he could not be certain that Mr. Janczak is optimally treated from a medication perspective. He has not been trialled on clozapine, which had been discussed with him and with his family. From the family’s perspective, Mr. Janczak has been managing very well, and clozapine can have significant side effects, so Dr. Shariati has not pursued a medication change.

30. Dr. Shariati spoke with Dr. Slade approximately four weeks prior to the hearing. She advised that she would have no concerns about continuing to follow Mr. Janczak if he were to receive an Absolute Discharge. Dr. Shariati believes that she is doing an excellent job with Mr. Janczak and remains interested in and engaged with him. Some time ago, the family had spoken of finding another psychiatrist closer to the Brantford community where they now live, due to the travel time and distance for monthly appointments in Mississauga. After Dr. Shariati explained the challenges of finding a community psychiatrist in the Brantford area, the family remained content to maintain the relationship with Dr. Slade.

31. In response to questions from counsel for the Attorney General, Dr. Shariati agreed that one of Mr. Janczak’s risk factors is his vulnerability to stress. Living on his own, as he did at the time of the index offences, was a big stressor for him. Dr. Shariati observed, for example, that in 2018, when a previous community psychiatrist recommended that Mr. Janczak add more structure to his day by obtaining employment, he stopped seeing that doctor and went off his medication. Then, in early 2019, he assaulted his mother and stepfather in his apartment. Dr. Shariati agreed with the statement in the Clinical Risk Summary that, “The durability of this stability under reduced supervision and wider community demands is less tested given his ongoing preference for limited activity outside the family setting.” When new things are suggested to Mr. Janczak, he tends not to accept them. Suggesting that activities such as work and volunteering would assist him in building his resilience in the community is seen by Dr. Shariati as idealistic. He could not say that Mr. Janczak would reach a level of social engagement that another individual would.

32. One concern that had been expressed at the previous year’s hearing was that Mr. Janczak was interested in living independently in his own apartment and failed to appreciate how such a move would be detrimental to his mental state (ORB Reasons, Dec. 20, 2024, paras. 14, 27). Dr. Shariati noted that over the past several months, Mr. Janczak has expressed a desire to remain living in the family home. There are no “friction points” between him and anyone in the home, including his brother who recently moved in.

33. Dr. Shariati was asked about troubling comments attributed to Mr. Janczak about his beliefs concerning the appropriateness of sexual activity with children. Counsel for Mr. Janczak pointed out that these comments (summarized at p. 8 of the Hospital Report) were reported to Dr. Jones at CAMH in 2022, but Dr. Shariati stated that Mr. Janczak had made completely consistent comments during his discussions with him. The comments were very uncomfortable for Mr. Janczak to discuss and caused Dr. Shariati to consider the possibility that Mr. Janczak had ASD (Autism Spectrum Disorder). There was no indication that Mr. Janczak had ever acted on such thoughts or identified a sexual interest in children.

34. Dr. Shariati confirmed that Mr. Janczak has not been connected to any resources for persons living with autism. He explained that the diagnosis has not been made, as there is an absence of reported childhood symptoms. He said that Dr. Slade is aware of the concern, and in the event of an Absolute Discharge, he would again refer the issue, together with the concern about Mr. Janczak’s social skills, to her.

35. Dr. Shariati addressed Mr. Janczak’s risk of sexual reoffending, noting a previous psychological risk assessment by Dr. Moulden that rated his risk as average in relation to convicted sex offenders. Dr. Shariati estimated his risk for sexual recidivism as “very low”, referencing a conversation he had with Dr. Moulden in preparation for the hearing. In that conversation, she expressed the opinion that Mr. Janczak is at such a low risk that it is no longer appropriate to apply the earlier risk assessment tool (Static-99R). The average rate of recidivism over five years for persons scored at Mr. Janczak’s level is 6 to 7 %, and Dr. Shariati stated that his actual risk is lower than this already-low risk.

36. Dr. Shariati was asked to comment on a reoffence scenario that had been prepared for Mr. Janczak’s 2023 hearing. For ease of reference, that scenario is reproduced herein:

If Mr. Janczak is to reoffend, this will likely transpire in the context of medication-noncompliance and/or stressors that he is unable to cope with. Mr. Janczak has a history of non-compliance with medication and has had many previous hospitalisations due to decompensations in his mental state. He also does not cope well with stress or to changes in his routine. His insight remains poor, and he continues to have significant symptoms of psychosis, though is managing quite well day-to-day with the help and support of his mother, and from the community mental health team. His ongoing symptoms are such that his mental state is quite fragile, and a small decompensation could have large consequences on his behavior and functioning. If he were to become non adherent to medication, or experience significant changes to his routine or experience personal losses, his mental state would deteriorate substantially. Under such circumstances, he is likely to become more disorganized and disinhibited, increasing the risk of further sexual assault or violence.

37. Dr. Shariati was specifically asked to comment on the statement, within the quoted scenario, that Mr. Janczak’s mental state is quite fragile and that a small decompensation could have “large consequences” in terms of his behaviour and functioning. He agreed with the statement. In his opinion, however, the scenario itself is unlikely to arise in Mr. Janczak’s current and foreseeable circumstances while he remains in the family home under his parents’ close supervision.

38. In response to questions from Mr. Janczak’s counsel, Dr. Shariati agreed that for approximately two years from the dates of the index offences to the date of the NCR finding, Mr. Janczak had lived by himself in a condominium owned by his family in Mississauga. He continued to live there through 2023, until his family moved to Brantford and he moved in with them. Throughout this period, there had been no allegations of breaches of pre-trial release conditions or other incidents.

39. Dr. Shariati was asked what he would like to see over the next reporting year in terms of Mr. Janczak’s progress. He mainly wished to see a continuation of the current arrangement, with ongoing appointments with Dr. Slade. He noted that Mr. Janczak completed Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for psychosis (CBT-p) in 2024 and should continue to practice those skills. If he continued his current course, Dr. Shariati would consider recommending an Absolute Discharge at the end of the next reporting year.

40. Dr. Shariati was asked by a panel member how Mr. Janczak’s family support is considered sustainable over the longer term. He responded that psychoeducation has been provided, and he will continue to work with the forensic case manager and with Dr. Slade on this issue.

41. Mrs. Janczak’s letter was submitted as Exhibit 3 at the hearing following the conclusion of Dr. Shariati’s testimony. It largely mirrored the information in the Hospital Report from the current reporting year, confirming that Mr. Janczak has indeed made some progress. Included in the letter are the following observations:

• Mr. Janczak continues to review the material from the CBT-p course and has been working on implementing some skills he has learned;

• Since moving into the family home, he has shown greater initiative in helping with various chores around the house, smiles more, and is kind to family and friends;

• Mr. Janczak has grown in his ability to tolerate electronic media, such as the television, the family computer, and having the radio on in the car;

• He has increased his contact with family members, including with his sister who recently moved to Brantford, and enjoys their company;

• He has grown closer to his brother, has shown interest in the brother’s projects, engages in meaningful conversations, and goes with him on occasional shopping trips;

• He spends a great deal of time reading, including regular reading of the Bible as well as books on new technology;

• He responsibly takes his medication without supervision;

• The family lives a peaceful lifestyle without any major stressors; and

• In his mother’s opinion, Mr. Janczak poses no risk to society and receives all the support that he needs.

42. No further evidence was led at the hearing.

Analysis and Conclusions

43. As stated in the Introduction, the panel concluded that the evidence did not support an affirmative finding that Mr. Janczak represents a significant threat to the safety of the public and accordingly, he must be absolutely discharged.

44. In Winko v. British Columbia (Forensic Psychiatric Institute), 1999 CanLII 694 (SCC), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 625, the Supreme Court of Canada stated that in coming to a conclusion on the issue of significant threat, a review board should closely examine a range of evidence including the circumstances of the original offence, the past and expected course of the accused's treatment, the present state of the NCR accused's medical condition and the NCR accused's own plans for the future, the support services existing for the NCR accused in the community and, perhaps most importantly, the recommendations provided by experts who have examined the NCR accused.

45. The index offences were serious in that they involved a violation of the sexual integrity of two female victims. The Victim Impact Statement written by one of them demonstrates and illustrates the serious psychological and physical harm that can potentially result from such behaviour. In addition, the offences do not stand alone.

46. Although Mr. Janczak has no criminal record, his history includes two physical assaults upon family members (an assault upon his terminally ill father in 2011 and an assault on his mother and stepfather in 2019). He had received both inpatient and outpatient care and had been prescribed antipsychotic medication, to which he appeared to respond well as long as he remained adherent. However, he was often non-compliant with his prescribed medication, and the assaults on his family as well as the index offences occurred during periods of non-compliance.

47. The panel appreciates that Mr. Janczak suffers from a major mental disorder, that this disorder was operative and manifested itself in a psychotic state when he committed two sexual assaults, and that he continues to be symptomatic despite being adherent to his prescribed medication. On the evidence, however, his residual active symptoms have not led to any criminal behaviour since the index offences. Individuals with mental disorders are not inherently dangerous: Winko, at p. 653. There is no presumption of dangerousness and no burden on the NCR accused to prove a lack of dangerousness: Winko, at pp. 660-661, 662.

48. The panel has also taken into consideration, as it must, the evidence that since the index offences, Mr. Janczak has learned from the experience and appears to appreciate that non-consensual touching is wrong. We note, in this regard, not only Mr. Janczak’s self-report as quoted in para. 22 above but also Dr. Shariati’s opinion, repeated several times in his evidence, to the effect that the criminal process has had a salutary effect upon Mr. Janczak.

49. The panel is cognizant of the fact that while there have been no further incidents of threats, interpersonal violence, or sexually inappropriate behaviour since the index offences, Mr. Janczak has been under various forms of community supervision throughout this period and, since his first Disposition of the Board, has been under the care of forensic outpatient services at CAMH and more recently SJHH, all the while maintaining his relationship with his community psychiatrist.

50. In addition, and in the panel’s estimation significantly, Mr. Janczak relies on his family to help him maintain his routine, engage in social activities, ensure his mental state remains stable, and adheres to taking his medications. Without their support, he is likely to experience significant difficulties with coping with daily stressors, and an inability to maintain a healthy routine. The concern about his mental state and risk of harm to others would be significantly increased if he was to live on his own at this juncture. However, while during the previous reporting year he made comments about wishing to live independently, the currently available evidence is that this is unrealistic and that he will be living in his parents’ home for the foreseeable future.

51. Accordingly, while we agree with the statement of the reoffence scenario, quoted above at para. 36, we also accept Dr. Shariati’s opinion that the scenario depicted therein is unlikely to materialize. The panel understands its responsibility to independently weigh the expert opinions presented in evidence and notes that this responsibility was recently the subject of commentary in Re Ramos, 2025 ONCA 820. In the present case, we are satisfied that Dr. Shariati’s opinion is entirely grounded in the evidence. In light of the likely future trajectory for Mr. Janczak’s treatment, the resources available to him in the community and in particular the massive family support that he enjoys, it would be speculative to conclude that Mr. Janczak is reasonably likely to engage in criminal conduct in the future that would cause serious physical or psychological harm to another person.

52. It is fair to say that the cornerstone of Mr. Janczak’s sustained success has been his medication adherence, the stability of his residence with his family, their ongoing supervision, and his engagement with his civil treatment team with which he and his family have committed to maintaining engagement after he receives and Absolute Discharge.

53. After considering the evidence and submissions of counsel, the panel found that the evidentiary burden to establish significant threat has not been met and is unable to conclude that Mr. Janczak is a significant threat to the safety of the public. For these reasons, he must be discharged absolutely.

54. Mr. Janczak has experienced several hardships over the years as an unfortunate consequence of his untreated mental illness. However, with the dedicated support of his family, in cooperation with the Hospital’s Forensic Outpatient Program, Dr. Shariati, and Dr. Slade at the Trillium Health Outpatient Ambulatory Mental Health Program, he has achieved and sustained a degree of stability and is to be congratulated. The panel wishes Mr. Janczak well in the future.

55. The panel wishes, however, to make the following concluding observations. First, Mr. Janczak is indeed very fortunate to have the enduring support of his family. They have provided a supportive and loving environment that minimizes the stressors on his life and are sensitive to the nature and degree of socialization and activity that Mr. Janczak can tolerate.

56. Second, the panel is of the opinion that more can and should be done to equip Mr. Janczak with the skills he needs to enable him to thrive in the community. His parents, however, should not be the ones to shoulder this burden. They are already doing more than what should be expected of them. We would strongly encourage Dr. Shariati and the rest of the forensic treatment team, as part of the transition of care to Dr. Slade and her clinic, to connect Mr. Janczak to local resources, including those for persons with autism spectrum disorder, such as can sometimes be associated with universities. The panel is hopeful, as Dr. Shariati indicated in his evidence, that the panel’s concerns for Mr. Janczak’s longer term stability in the community will be shared with Dr. Slade.

DATED this 2^nd day of January 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.

Eric Siebenmorgen

Legal Member

Office of the Registrar

Ontario Review Board