Eduardo Santiago

Overview

Eduardo Santiago was sentenced to death on January 31, 2005 after a jury convicted him of capital felony and murder charges connected to the shooting of Joseph Niwinski.

The offence

Joseph Niwinski was shot in the left temple while he slept in his West Hartford apartment on December 14, 2000. Santiago was convicted in connection with the killing. Prosecutors said Santiago carried out a murder-for-hire scheme in which he agreed to kill Niwinski in exchange for a broken snowmobile and his credit card debt being paid off.

A lawyer described Santiago’s case as lacking “clear evidence” that Santiago was the one who pulled the rifle trigger. Joseph Niwinski was 45.

Investigation

Prosecutors argued that Niwinski was killed in a murder-for-hire plot, and that this supported an aggravating factor for the death penalty.

Trial

A jury convicted Santiago of capital felony and murder charges relating to the December 14, 2000 shooting.

Santiago was described as a “former Torrington resident” during the death penalty appeal hearing. During the appeal hearing, Santiago’s lawyer, Assistant Public Defender Mark Rademacher, said there was no way a reasonable jury could have condemned Santiago, and also stated that “This is really the least aggravating case that has ever come before this court,” adding: “The victim in this case did not suffer one iota of pain.”

Rademacher said the defense presented 25 mitigating factors for jurors to consider against the death penalty, including “Santiago’s troubled childhood.”

Sentencing

Santiago was sentenced to death by lethal injection in 2005.

In Connecticut, the sentencing framework described was that juries that convict defendants of capital felony must then consider whether to recommend the death penalty or life in prison without the possibility of release by deciding whether proven aggravating factors outweigh proven mitigating factors.

The state based its argument for execution on one aggravating factor: that Niwinski was killed in a murder-for-hire plot. The appeal hearing discussion also included that, while state lawmakers were debating the death penalty law in 1973, they considered murder for hire to be “the most heinous capital crime.”

Appeals

Death penalty appeal hearing

A lawyer told the state Supreme Court that Santiago’s death penalty case was “the weakest one ever to go before the high court,” alleging that the jury was biased and that key evidence was improperly withheld from the trial.

The hearing included allegations that a juror acknowledged the panel was disappointed that prosecutors had only one aggravating factor and that jurors improperly considered other aggravating factors not listed in state law.

The justices questioned the lawyers about whether criminal defendants’ rights trumped the privacy rights of others. The issue was raised in part by Santiago’s appeal accusing the trial judge of wrongly refusing to release an entire state Department of Children and Families file on Santiago and his family. The judge released portions dealing with Santiago but declined to disclose other parts dealing with his relatives because of privacy concerns.

Rademacher said releasing the rest of the DCF file could have given the jury more mitigating evidence and a fuller picture of Santiago’s troubled past. Rademacher described Santiago’s childhood as “grim,” saying it included beatings by his mother and stepfather, sexual molestation, and “his nine-year journey through foster care, psychiatric hospitals, orphanages, and shelters.”

Rademacher said: “This is really the least aggravating case that has ever come before this court.” He also said: “The victim in this case did not suffer one iota of pain.”

Marjorie Allen Dauster, senior assistant state's attorney, told the court that prosecutors proved the murder-for-hire aggravating factor listed in state law and that the jury was right to condemn Santiago. Dauster also pointed out the legislative discussion from 1973: “the most heinous capital crime.”

Justices were described as expected to take several months to issue a ruling.

Other details

Two other men were serving life prison sentences for the killing of Joseph Niwinski. The appeal hearing description stated that Niwinski was shot in the head while sleeping in his home.