Often? I would say very rarely. Who would release such information?
I would not expect technical details to emerge right away, but I'd be interested in them. Yes. it may come out later.
We now know what gun Jack Ruby used to kill LHO, and even the bullet track in JHO. (I was amazed at what damage that snubby .38 did.)
Even with Bonnie and Clyde, it was interesting that the embalmer noted it was hard to embalm them with all the bullet hole leakage and this information came out right away;
I'm a bit squeamish myself, but I still find that kind of technical information interesting. Yes, a death, any death, can be tragic, but I don't see why yuu would object to the details which sometimes have to come out later.
Take the James Dean deadly car accident. Tragic, yes, but the traffic details were interesting and useful even though it was a while before the investigation was completed. (Moral: pretend you're invisible in a small car.)
So in an event like the OP, I wouldn't expect details right away but, like the details later available in that church shooting in Texas, I'm sure both you and I found the narrative by the church guardian himself fascinating.
This is the shooting to which I refer:
https://deanblundell.com/news/video...es-unreal-headshot-by-security-guard-graphic/
I can't find the interview with the "guardian;" I wonder if it has been cleansed from the 'net. Also, the You Tubes of the actual shooting seem to universally have a You Tube Privacy warning. That, in and of itself, is interesting.
Remember the pix of the victims of the Valentine's Day massacre? Pretty informative in its details.
Anyhow, I'm for details, which I am patient enough to wait for --even for years.
Terry, 230RN