As Richiev has done, it’s better to suggest a single protagonist. It’s easier for the audience to see the story through an individual’s eyes rather than trying to get them to understand several people’s points of view and emotional involvement.

In your version, there is nothing that suggests that this is a one of many high profile events. You’ve focused on the specifics of this one case so, as Richiev has done, the goal should be something specific to this case – i.e. solving it. If you want it to be about a series of events I would adapt the inciting incident to reflect that – “After another high profile murder/suicide is added to the list” or similar.

I’m assuming that it’s the entrepreneur’s widow? I’d recommend clarifying this as, by saying he kills his whole family, it suggests that she’s dead. See Richiev’s example.

Currently, the new age guru is a bit redundant. I don’t think it’s necessary to include him/her in the logline as there is nothing that tells us why they would be getting involved. This doesn’t mean this character can’t be in the story, they just don’t need to be in the logline.

Hope this helps.