Like I said, it was probably just a coincidence. If there was a connection, it could have been a warning or revenge. Robert Kennedy was his Atty Gen., and would have been in charge of the Justice Dept. that was in charge of the investigation or whatever you call it. Getting rid of the top brother was getting rid of the other brother as well. I don’t think RFK stayed on too long under Johnson. The trial was most probably cancelled for the day once the assassination occurred. And Robert Kennedy also was gunned down several years later. Who knows what was really going on behind the scenes?
“Getting rid of the top brother was getting rid of the other brother as well. I don’t think RFK stayed on too long under Johnson.”
No, he didn’t stay on all that long. But what assurance was there that the man Johnson chose to succeed him would be any better? Really, what are the odds that a new Attourney General would scrap a case already in the works even if he didn’t care as much as RFK about destroying the mob. Killing the president is way too much of a risk with absolutely no guarantee of success on the other end. Mafiosos are businessmen (of a sort), not lone nuts.
By the way, the same goes for all the Soviet/Castro conspiracy theories. What they could have expected to gain was nothing compared to what they were risking.