I would say that in cases like this one, where family members have less than stellar backgrounds or people around them who have less than stellar backgrounds, would be more inclined to omit things when talking to the police - like having a convicted felon over etc, because look where the thought process goes.
Yes, maybe sometimes that person could have done something, but lots of times they haven't and some cases have been messed around by the police or the media having the focus on the wrong person just because they have a history. It prevents things from getting solved. It becomes too much of the focus so often.
I understand why there's often little information in certain cases from certain demographics - look how that reporter skewed the information by going on about Grandma's unrelated convictions. Like as if they're adding it for colour to say "Well, they're those kind of people, so it makes sense".
The convicted felon in this case doesn't seem to have contributed to anything, but still, it colours people's views of the situation. It's interesting.
Usually I'd err on that side too, but it's sort of heartbreaking when you can see the mechanics of blame at play in the media especially. I know it's two completely different cases and two completely different areas, but it's interesting how quick they are to mention this families legal issues, when you compare it to say, Emily Glass, whom I felt even the media and even the police were reluctant to call her out for what she was, even though she had her convictions.
It comes down to poor reporting and regional bias, because you really should be able to piece together a story without adding journalistic MSG like a shoplifting record. Yet there it is.