I don't think there's ever been a single mass murder of black people by whites in America that was not _____________ motivated by racism, which explains why the media would naturally speculate on racism for such crimes, and generally does not assume racism when there is an office shooting, a serial killer, or a missing persons case.
I would suggest that the word "allegedly" or "presumably" or "assumedly" or something a little less definitive be inserted there.
When a white person kills blacks, or a straight person assaults gays, or most any other "majority" on "other" group crime occurs, "hate" is seemingly always presumptively assumed, even when there is no actual
evidence to that effect (other than the identity of each) or the perpetrator has even stated their motive was "neutrally" criminal.
In the Wichita and Knoxville cases, IIRC, the perpetrators
explicitly stated racist motives to their victims (well the surviving one reported slurs and such statements) and to their interrogators.
That's a big difference, hate is assumed (and usually prosecuted for regardless of real evidence) when it's "white on minority" while the authorities are quick to state that there is no "hate crime angle" in most "minority on white" incidents.
That's an extant double standard that brain-dead PC thinking has created. The insistence that non-PC motivations make the exact same crimes somehow "worse" and deserving of more severe (versus merely equivilent) punishments.
It's time for hate crime (essentially thought crime) laws to be cast onto the dust heap of history with other racial/group based laws.