Why does JFK's assassination get so much more attention than RFK's?

[Frederick Clements]

 Perhaps because JFK was a President but RFK was a Senator.

Fred

[Michael T. Griffith]

One, because at first glance, RFK's assassination seems so straightforward, simple, and open-and-shut. Two, because JFK was president, whereas RFK was an attorney general and then a senator.

[Jon Banks]

One, because at first glance, RFK's assassination seems so straightforward, simple, and open-and-shut. Two, because JFK was president, whereas RFK was an attorney general and then a senator.

I disagree that RFK’s murder is open and shut.

I agree that JFK gets more attention than his brother because he was a sitting President.

I also think the Zapruder film makes a difference.

People can see with their own eyes that the official conclusions don’t add up in the JFK investigation whereas, reading about the inconsistencies in the RFK investigation evidence isn’t the same as seeing the murder on film...

[Louis Earl]

Interesting.  "A lie too big to fail?"  Hold my beer.

[Ray Mitcham]

Interesting.  "A lie too big to fail?"  Hold my beer.

Have you read it, Louis?

[Andrew Mason]

On the surface, RFK's murder seems like more of an open and shut case due to his assassin being arrested, prosecuted, and found Guilty.

But the evidence pointing to a Conspiracy seems far more convincing.

- Based on audio and the FBI's reports, there were more than 8 shots fired. At least 13 shots based on an audio recording.
- Sirhan never got close enough to RFK to have fired the fatal head shot from behind his ear
- Dozens of witnesses saw Sirhan accompanied by an unidentified young woman and a man on the night of RFK's murder and at several places, including shooting ranges, days prior to the murder
- Sirhan is easily hypnotized and showed signs of hypnosis the night of RFK's murder. He also has no memory of shooting RFK

Given brief overview above, why is it that there is significantly less attention paid to the RFK assassination compared to the JFK assassination?

It is not lack of evidence of a conspiracy that is the problem.  Neither case has any evidence of a conspiracy.  It just doesn't makes sense in RFK's case.

A conspiracy with multiple shooters is much easier to conjure up when the shooter is hidden, the target is a very powerful person, the target's location is known days in advance so plans can be made, and the perpetrator(s) can escape from the scene ie. the JFK assassination.   

The RFK assassination took place in a location - a hotel kitchen - that absolutely no one could have predicted and planned for let alone chosen as a good one with low probability of escape for the perpetrator.  RFK was not in a position of power and his opponents were not of a different mind on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.  There is not a compelling reason for others to share Sirhan's political reason.  Possible conspirators, such as the mob, would be unlikely to conspire with someone like Sirhan.  And if they had, it is even more unlikely that they would let him get captured alive let alone live for 52 years and counting afterward.  The possibility of a conspiracy in RFK's assassination is just not very compelling.
 

[Jon Banks]

It is not lack of evidence of a conspiracy that is the problem.  Neither case has any evidence of a conspiracy.  It just doesn't makes sense in RFK's case.

A conspiracy with multiple shooters is much easier to conjure up when the shooter is hidden, the target is a very powerful person, the target's location is known days in advance so plans can be made, and the perpetrator(s) can escape from the scene ie. the JFK assassination.   

The RFK assassination took place in a location - a hotel kitchen - that absolutely no one could have predicted and planned for let alone chosen as a good one with low probability of escape for the perpetrator.  RFK was not in a position of power and his opponents were not of a different mind on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.  There is not a compelling reason for others to share Sirhan's political reason.  Possible conspirators, such as the mob, would be unlikely to conspire with someone like Sirhan.  And if they had, it is even more unlikely that they would let him get captured alive let alone live for 52 years and counting afterward.  The possibility of a conspiracy in RFK's assassination is just not very compelling.
 

The actual Forensic evidence proves Sirhan couldn't have fired the shots that killed RFK.

It's not speculation that there was more than one shooter. There's proof.

Prosecutors withheld the autopsy report from Sirhan’s defense lawyers until six weeks into the trial, showing that Kennedy had been shot at point-blank range from behind.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2018/06/05/did-l-a-police-and-prosecutors-bungle-the-bobby-kennedy-assassination/

He also couldn't have fired more than 8 shots yet there's evidence that as many as 13 shots were fired...