Justice With Dignity - Committee to Remember Kimberly Rogers

Kimberly Rogers Inquest Alerts

Finding Answers: the Kimberly Rogers Inquest

By Kim Brooks, National Association of Women and the Law
[to be published in Jurisfemme vol.21 n.3 Fall 2002]

At its most extreme, the criminalization of poverty costs lives. That is exactly what happened to Kimberly Rogers.

Kimberly Rogers

Kimberly Rogers was charged and pled guilty to welfare fraud in April 2001. She had collected social assistance and failed to report that she was collecting student loans simultaneously. Social assistance recipients cannot also collect student loans without a reduction in their social assistance payments. Justice Greg Rogers sentenced Kimberly to 18 months probation and imposed a six-month conditional sentence. For the six-month period, Kimberly was required to stay in her apartment. She was only permitted to leave once a week for three hours. In addition to these penalties, she was ordered to pay $13,372.67 restitution.

Punishment did not stop with Justice Rogers’ judicial sentence. Ontario’s social assistance regulations (under the Ontario Works Act) required Kimberly’s social assistance to be cut off for three months. Kimberly was cut off even though she was pregnant at the time. (These rules have subsequently been made even more punitive. For welfare fraud convictions that relate to periods that occurred in whole or in part after April 1, 2000, the claimant is cut off from receiving any benefits for life.)

In May, Kimberly began a constitutional challenge to the regulations. Her application for interim relief, heard by Madam Justice Epstein, was granted and Kimberly’s social assistance payments were reinstated. The effect of this decision was limited to Kimberly Rogers, and was focused in particular on the dangers of denying social assistance payments to a pregnant woman.

To give some shape to the amount of the benefits Kimberly received, as a single person, Kimberly was entitled to $520 a month and a drug card. She had rent payments of $450 a month, and was required to pay $52 a month against her overpayment. Even though Justice Epstein’s judgment was a victory, it left only $18 a month for food, telephone, clothing and other expenses.

Not surprisingly, Kimberly was taking anti-depressants. She was unable to afford the basic necessities for living. Her apartment was unbearably hot, and the house arrest made it extremely difficult to seek assistance or community support.

Kimberly Rogers died on August 9, 2001 in her apartment in Sudbury. The cause of death will be determined by the jury at the inquest into her death.

The Inquest

The Inquest into the death of Kimberly Rogers was announced on September 24th, 2001. It began in Sudbury on October 15, 2002. The purpose of the Inquest to examine the circumstances surrounding Kimberly’s death and the Inquest jury may make recommendations aimed at preventing future deaths.

NAWL is co-intervening in the Inquest with the Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies, the Legal Education and Action Fund, and the National Anti-Poverty Organization. The aim of our coalition is to identify the effect of the federal government’s approach to criminal and social justice on the abrogation of provincial and municipal responsibilities to poor women. We also seek to demonstrate how the federal government’s approach has resulted in the increased feminization of poverty and the criminalization of women who are indigent, mentally and/or cognitively disabled and otherwise marginalized. The coalition is fortunate to have Chantal Tie and Jennifer Scott acting as counsel.

Extrapolating from the Specifics

Kimberly Rogers’ death was a tragedy, and one that should cause national alarm. But it was not unpredictable. It can be located in the increasing criminalization of poverty.

Our abandonment of low-income Canadians began most obviously in 1995, when the federal government abandoned the Canada Assistance Plan and its standards for social assistance. The only remaining standard is that a province cannot require a minimum period of residency for social assistance recipients and still receive a federal government transfer payment to support social assistance.

The Ontario provincial government has followed the federal government’s indication that abandoning poor people is acceptable, even appropriate. Social assistance payments have been dramatically cut, work-for-welfare programs have been implemented, and mandatory drug and literacy testing have been proposed. Welfare fraud charges have become more common, and social assistance can no longer be collected when a recipient is found guilty.

The government portrayal of low-income people as cheats is picked up in the media, and the result is an increased public acceptance of poor bashing.

All of these changes have negative effects for women, and particularly for single mothers. Poverty leaves people in precarious life situations. The government has an obligation to provide support to low-income folks, not to criminalize people who lack economic power.

Kimberly Rogers’ treatment is just one illustration of the human rights violations that the new Ontario social assistance rules require. Her house arrest was a cruel form of punishment – only in the most extreme cases should “prisoners” be placed in solitary confinement, and yet for just under $14,000 we imposed that sentence on Kimberly.

Hopefully the Inquest will result in recommendations that will be acted upon in order to ensure that this kind of tragedy does not occur again.




Website design courtesy of

Barbara Anello