Somebody died again a few months ago, and (yay for us) like clockwork, patronizing self-righteous media clown Fancie Krace and her crew of fellow loquacious, U.S. Constitution-shredding boob-tube dunderheads showed up at the scene of the crime to name the murderer on international television. But in a twist, Fancie Krace was herself bludgeoned the other day as she got out of her car and walked to her office overlooking downtown. Connection? That's for you to figure out. Who (A) are the suspects in Fancie Krace's murder? Who (B) have been ruled out as persons of interest in the investigation? And who (C) is the killer? Assume that: 1.) everyone tells the truth; 2.) anyone who has a family member once found guilty by a jury in a trial given prime-time media attention by the late Fancie Krace is a suspect in Krace's murder; and 3.) every member of the late Krace's tv crew is present at the murder scene. "Adjacent" (a.k.a. "flanking/ flanked") includes diagonally, and if someone says he or she can see the murderer, that means the murderer must be in that someone's direct line of sight — vertically, horizontally or diagonally. THERE IS ONLY ONE MURDERER, AND YOU WILL NOT KNOW WHO THE MURDERER IS UNTIL SOMEONE—BE IT A SUSPECT OR AN INNOCENT—TELLS YOU THAT HE/ SHE CAN SEE THE MURDERER, as suspects cannot qualify as both suspects and the murderer. Let's do this investigation right so we can give something to the murderer that the late Fancie never gave to anyone who got in sight of her cameras: namely, a fair trial. May the Force—and the cameras, most importantly, of course—be with you.