Peter Beckett has been found guilty of first-degree murder in the mysterious 2010 drowning of his wife.
The seven men, five women Kelowna jury returned with the verdict Saturday.
He was sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole for 25 years.
Crown鈥檚 case against Beckett was larHe gely circumstantial with only one piece of direct evidence before the jury 鈥� the statement the former New Zealand politician gave within a day of Aug. 18, 2010, when Laura Letts-Beckett drowned on Upper Arrow Lakes.
Crown counsel Iain Currie told the jury of seven men and five women that the direct evidence available to them was enough to prove Beckett killed his wife for personal gain.
In that statement Beckett tells police that when his wife hit the water, she thrashed about and screamed. As she struggled to stay afloat, he relied on a 鈥渇isherman鈥檚 instinct鈥� and reeled in the line to his fishing rod. As he did, his boat floated past his wife and by the time he turned around she had been submerged.
鈥淲e say Mr. Beckett murdered his wife, just to be clear,鈥� said Currie. 鈥淲e鈥檙e saying the fact he didn鈥檛 save her when that would have been easy 鈥� easy to try, instinctive to try, unavoidable to try, unless you don鈥檛 want to. The fact he didn鈥檛 save his wife is evidence that he pushed her out.鈥�
Currie told jurors that when Beckett said that he had a fisherman鈥檚 instinct and no instinct to save his wife, it鈥檚 because he鈥檚 lying.
鈥淗e鈥檚 lying because he pushed her in,鈥� said Currie. 鈥淭he evidence is that he wanted her dead and he pushed her in.鈥�
Supporting that argument, he said, is evidence that the couple took out an accidental death policy two months before the drowning, Beckett had jail house conversations with a known conman about getting rid of witnesses who could make him look guilty of killing his wife and he was fixated on getting an inheritance from his wife鈥檚 wealthy parents.
Beckett鈥檚 lawyer told jurors that wasn鈥檛 enough to convict Beckett.
Marilyn Sandford argued the day before there was no incentive for murder and if her client was motivated by money at all, he鈥檇 be better off keeping his wife alive. As a longtime school teacher Letts-Beckett made a good wage that couldn鈥檛 be replaced by the pension she鈥檇 leave behind which, including CPP, amounted to around $2,600 a month.
He was, in short, a grieving husband who acted strangely in the days after he lost his wife in traumatic circumstances.
This wasn鈥檛 Beckett鈥檚 first trial.
over four months in 2016. In the end it was considered a mistrial, with jurors reaching an 11-1 impasse. It is not known what outcome was being sought by the majority.
In the end, a single B.C. juror stood in the way of whether Peter Beckett would walk free鈥攐r be declared a murderer鈥攁fter the mysterious 2010 boating accident that left his wife Laura Letts-Beckett dead.
鈥淣o one testified, 鈥業 saw Mr. Beckett cause the death of his wife鈥� 鈥� there isn鈥檛 a smoking gun,鈥� said closing statements by Beckett鈥檚 defense lawyer, according to reporting by Kamloops This Week.
That trial also hinged largely on circumstantial evidence.
