Most people may believe Philip Polkinghorne did murder his wife, but the jury made the right decision to find him not guilty, says a journalist who covered the case.
Steve Braunias, who covered the eight-week murder trial and went on to write a book, says common sense suggests the Auckland eye surgeon committed murder – but all the facts suggest “completely the reverse”.
Polkinghorne, an Auckland eye surgeon, was acquitted of murdering his wife Pauline Hanna after a High Court at Auckland trial in 2024.
The prosecution argued Polkinghorne strangled Hanna to death and staged the scene to make it look like suicide before he called police to the property on April 5 2021.
The defence argued that Polkinghorne was innocent and had simply woken, gone downstairs and found his wife dead.
Braunias reflects on the case in a just-released new interview with the Between Two Beers podcast on TVNZ+.
Asked if he thought Polkinghorne had killed Hanna, he said: “Common sense would tell you that surely that she was killed by Phil that night.
“Everything about it points to a murder. All of the facts suggest completely the reverse.
“They are unequivocal. They tell you that this poor woman was in such despair that she took her own life. It’s common sense versus the facts and that’s a distillation of the entire trial.”
Braunias said the jury deliberated “judiciously and responsibly” before acquitting Polkinghorne.
“I think they came to their verdict pretty reluctantly, did it really responsibly. I think there was a real reluctance,” he told podcast hosts Steve Holloway and Seamus Marten.
“I don’t think they liked him, there certainly wasn’t a sympathy vote or an endorsement of Phil.”
Braunias agreed that the public may think Polkinghorne was responsible for his wife’s death.
“I think the national feeling is that he got away with it and a clever lawyer or things like that.”
However Braunias quickly added: “I more than entertain the shocking possibility that Phil is an innocent man. And what happened to him was a travesty that he was charged and put on trial and humiliated and had his life turned upside down.”
Braunias said he had initially only planned to report on the first days of the murder trial but within two hours he became hooked on the “fascinating” case.
“It was a history about Auckland. This garish extravagant much-despised city of rich wankers as it’s perceived.
“Phil was being perceived and presented as the ultimate rich wanker who had behaved apparently appallingly and then was accused of killing his wife.”
During the trial Braunias established a convivial relationship with Polkinghorne, chatting during court breaks.
Asked if he liked the murder accused, Braunias said: “Yeah very much, yeah very likeable, chatty, unusual, self-deprecating.”
The author said he was warned that Polkinghorne may be trying to manipulate him.
“People would subsequently say to me ‘oh you know he doesn’t like you, he’s just manipulating you’ and I was aware of that even before I was told that.
“I was writing about him so it was probably in his interest to be nice. I don’t think that came into it honestly, I don’t think he could help himself, he was just a very expressive guy.”
Braunias said the trial and the intense public interest in the case still remained with him to this day.
He went on to publish a book Polkinghorne: Inside the trial of the century and he told the podcast that covering case was a career highlight.
Pauline Hanna’s death will be probed by a coroner’s inquest, which is scheduled to take place in August.
See more episodes of the Between Two Beers podcast on TVNZ+
SHARE ME