Consider, for a moment, a hypothetical case in which an angry anti-abortion activist massacres worshippers gathered at a liberal church known for its advocacy of abortion rights.

What about a radicalized Muslim attacking a synagogue? A gunman decked out in Make America Great Again clothing attacking a mosque?

Would facts about the identities of these shooters, as well as their previous statements and actions, be considered relevant in follow-up stories? We are, of course, wrestling — again — with the “Why?” component in the journalism mantra, "Who," "What," "When," "Where," "Why" and "How."

In this case, we are dealing with background materials in media coverage of a development in the 2017 massacre at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas. Here’s the New York Times headline: “Air Force Ordered to Pay $230 Million to Victims of 2017 Church Shooting.” The overture states:

A federal judge ordered the U.S. Air Force … to pay more than $230 million to the survivors and the families of the victims of a 2017 shooting at a Texas church because the Air Force had failed to report the gunman’s criminal history.
In his ruling, Judge Xavier Rodriguez of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas wrote that the Air Force could have blocked the gunman, Devin P. Kelley, who had served on an Air Force base in New Mexico, from buying the rifle he used to kill 26 people on Nov. 5, 2017, at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas.
For its failure to report Mr. Kelley’s 2012 conviction for domestic assault, the Air Force must pay damages to the victims for their “pain and suffering, mental anguish, disfigurement, impairment and loss of companionship,” the judge wrote. He added that the case was “unprecedented in kind and scope.”

After previous commentary on this massacre, some readers noted that — reacting to detailed coverage in European newspapers — it wasn’t automatically relevant that Kelley was an outspoken atheist.

That is a valid point. However, my question is whether it is worthy of discussion (perhaps one or two sentences in news reports) that he had, in arguments on social media, expressed virulently anti-Christian beliefs and made remarks that suggested he was unstable. See this earlier post: “Texas church massacre: What to do with atheism arguments on that Facebook page?” For more information on the family dynamics in this shooting, see this earlier Bobby Ross, Jr., post: “ 'The hardest story I've ever written': Journalist masterfully tells story of church gunman's wife.”

Readers will not be surprised that the Times is all over the legal elements of this case, especially those linked to the purchase of the gun. That is essential information, especially in light of the court’s ruling.

Under federal law, Mr. Kelley should not have been allowed to buy the military-style rifle or the three other guns he acquired before the shooting. He purchased the weapons after he was convicted of domestic assault against his wife and stepson, whose skull he admitted to cracking.

As for the event itself, the Times included these details:

On Nov. 15, 2017, Mr. Kelley walked into a Sunday service at a small Baptist church and fired at the parishioners worshiping in the pews. The victims ranged in age from 5 to 72, and among the dead were a pregnant woman and the pastor’s 14-year-old daughter.
A neighbor shot Mr. Kelley twice as he exited the church. Mr. Kelley jumped in his car and led the neighbor and another man in a car chase. The gunman crashed his car and was found dead behind the wheel, where officials said he had shot himself in the head.

Why did this man attack this church? What were the ties that bind, in terms of Kelley’s broken family and this congregation? Once again, see the earlier GetReligion posts for background information.

However, the Times team completely ignored the anti-Christian elements of this massacre.

What about other major players in the coverage? Here is the key background information in the Washington Post update, which does not appear to have included any input from the newspaper’s veteran religion-beat specialists:

Kelley enlisted in 2010 and served as a logistical readiness airman at Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico, Air Force spokeswoman Ann Stefanek told The Washington Post in the aftermath of the shooting. He had a string of legal troubles beginning as early as 2012, when he was court-martialed and sentenced to a year in military prison for assaulting his wife and child.
Following his prison sentence, Kelley was reduced in rank and released from the military with a bad conduct discharge in 2014. Earlier that year, he was also charged with a misdemeanor count of mistreatment, neglect or cruelty to animals in El Paso County, Colo., where he lived at one point, records show.

What about the Associated Press?

An Air Force record of the Kelley court-martial says he pleaded guilty to multiple specifications of assault, including striking his wife, choking her with his hands and kicking her. He also was convicted of striking his stepson on the head and body “with a force likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm.”
In 2012, several months before his conviction in the domestic violence case, Kelley briefly escaped from a mental health center in New Mexico and got in trouble for bringing guns onto a military base and threatening his superiors there, police reports indicate.

All of that is relevant, of course. But the question is whether this man’s anti-Christian statements and threats were relevant and, perhaps, were linked to dynamics inside his broken family.

Can you imagine the religion elements being ignored in other cases? (Yes, we have seen debates about some journalists avoiding references to radicalized forms of Islam when dealing with some attacks on synagogues. That’s an important issue.)

Isn’t it relevant if a mentally unstable man fought with Christians online, using extreme language, and then went on to massacre believers in church pews? What is the journalistic motive for omitting this information from one or two sentences in hard-news coverage?

Just asking. Again.

FIRST IMAGE: A screen shot from CNN YouTube on memorial rites at First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas.