Was convicted assassin of Robert Kennedy, Sirhan Sirhan, the true killer, or was there a second gunman involved who fired the fatal shot from behind?

While Sirhan Sirhan was a gunman, the fatal shot to the head of Kennedy was done from behind, and this was covered up subsequently, through manipulation of the recollection of witnesses via mind control. And then, any further attempt to use the forensic evidence that was recorded accurately, was met with suppression on the part of the media and the public, who might have some initial curiosity to look into the matter but then encountered this wall of containment and were, themselves, brought into the subjugation so they would lose their interest and turn away. This became an area of investigation that was simply fenced-off from public involvement, and the public was given a false narrative to satisfy them with an official blessing and, as with other such operations, the media went along and swallowed the story whole. This was again through a suspension of their investigative instincts to scrutinize things carefully—to look for hidden flaws and motives, and things that were questionable or inexplicable, and then follow them to a deeper understanding. This is the way such events are thoroughly investigated normally, and the truth will then come out for the benefit of historical accounts, and often the initial reports of an event will change with time, with this greater-detailed scrutiny. In many instances when there are political stakes involved, the initial story will change, not because of greater depth of investigation and care, to find the truth, but through manipulation, destruction of evidence, and mind control implantation of false witness accounts, alternative interpretations that normally would be rejected, and a complacency to quickly decide things are already well in hand, have been thoroughly explained, or have been adequately explained. And so, there is no benefit to spending further time and effort on a dead end, and then people will move on, after only a cursory exploration of available evidence. This, coupled with removal of incriminating evidence that is contrary to the cover story, makes it possible to do almost anything, and change the meaning, and manipulate history profoundly with respect to what has happened. This happens again, and again, and works so well it can be done quite readily. The powers that be are, themselves, very complacent because they have been successful for so long they have little worry about being discovered carrying out nefarious plans that are contrary to national interest, and even human decency. They know that public opinion can be easily persuaded by having a patsy to blame, or a trivial explanation of bureaucratic inefficiency, human error and oversight, and so on, and people will understand. It is wise, at times, to give the public officials the benefit of the doubt and not burden them unduly with harsh interpretation of negligence when an event of cataclysmic importance takes place and everyone is in a state of emotional crisis. So allowances are made seemingly out of common sense, decency, and a sympathetic view towards people caught up in such horrendous experiences. But this is often allowing the travesty of justice to proceed right under the noses of the people who, themselves, were involved. This ultimately serves only the interlopers, as all who participated are left with some karmic consequences owing to their tacit complicity in the events or the cover-up to keep it quiet.