I don't need pictures. But you should consider this: Nowadays people use computer networks for their research. Whether it be LexisNexis or Google, what you find is determined by the search terms you use.
"Gee, I remember this case, there was this gay guy, I think he took his boyfriend hostage and ended up super-gluing him. Something like that ... let's see if we can find it ...
Search term: (homosexual or gay) and superglue and kidnapping
Result: this never happened.
If you need it plainer: journalists leave "homosexual" out of stories that are supposed to disappear and not show up in future searches.
Well, it might be too soon for the "kidnapping" part to show up in the search engines, but I just googled on:
gay super-glue
and got 120,000 hits, with references to the application of super-glue to body parts (mostly unintentional, of course) sprinkled throughout, starting with the first (a TV show on the gay channel, not surprisingly). I suspect that in a couple of days, even this kidnapping/hostage situation might well show up.
I'm not defending the MSM's propensity for leaving certain aspects of stories out, but just saying, something like this is sorta unusual and might not show up in casual searches.
You say you'd like to see the word "homosexual" in the story. How about "gay" or "queer" (both considered non-derogatory these days by gays) instead? Where does the news-story-as-thesaurus stop? The stated facts that they were all men and lovers pretty much covers it, IMO.
Besides, if it had been a man and two women, would you expect the word "heterosexual" to be included in the story? I wouldn't.