No. That argument is disposed of in Basich cited above. The reakateering activities only have to be the "proximate cause" of injuries to Byrne. He does not have to demonstrate that the conspirators intended to target him specfically - though I think his allegations cover him there anyway. They certainly did intend to target him and did so, if the facts stated are true.
Good! If the logic holds, then any taxpayer has standing. Maybe we even have some ambitious attorneys who could pull together a class action lawsuit (assuming sufficient personal security).