SOP for police not to discuss a possible motive if they know one? (Winkler case)

I’m a little puzzled over the authorities’ apparent reluctance to discuss a possible motive in the Winkler case. A couple of days ago here in the same neck of the woods as Selmer, TN, in a Section 8 housing development a young African-American fellow shot another young African-American fellow over a young lady, and we had the whole story a couple hours later on the 6 o’clock news.

I don’t mean to sound naive, but does who the parties are still play that much of a factor in releasing information in situations like these? I don’t mean to suggest any coverup, but heck she confessed, they told us that much, why not tell us why she said she did it as well? Because she’s a white, semi-rural, middle-class Chrisitian they treat her and her community with more deference than someone from a more disadvantaged background? Or is this pretty much SOP for police departments around the country and the openess of the love triangle shooting the exception? I guess I could understand such reluctance to divulge if there was a Gates or Trump involved, but WTHeck?

My money says that if they don’t tell the motive, they don’t have one.

According to reports, she told them why she did it when she confessed.

I’m just guessing here, but I suspect she’s alleged some kind of abuse, perhaps
involving her or the children. It’s a small community, if you were in a position of
authority, would you lay it all out, or would you think it wise to try to corroborate her
accusations before going public.
I’m not a fan of government secrecy and I agree that socioeconomic status too often
plays a role in what kind of justice is meted out, but I see some serious revelations
coming out in this case.