MLK has a heart attack

From what I've read, Martin Luther King's heart health was exceptionally poor. So it isn't entirely implausible that he could have had a heart attack in the period in which he died. So, for the sake of convergence, let's say King's natural, albeit sudden death, comes when he historically died. Sometime after the "Mountain Top" speech, but before James Earl Ray has a chance to shoot him, King has a heart attack. Despite all efforts to save his life, Martin Luther King is dead as per OTL in 1968. What effect does removing King's assassination, but not his death, have if any? Will there still be riots over King's death? I know this is a bit convergent, but I wanted to see what happens if I change a single factor. That is, what happens if King's death is natural, and not an act of murder.
 
I don't think there will be riots, just mourning. RFK will probably announce it to the crowd, since he has a campaign stop in downtown Indy anyways. He's still seen as MLK's successor by the black populace, but those expectations need to be tamped down because that's baggage in the general.
 
MLK wouldn't be remembered as much and would be just another civil rights leader along with Malcom X and Rosa Parks.
 
The effects are bigger if you change the timing. How bad was his heart? Could he have had a fatal attack sooner? Or could he have even had a crippling attack at an earlier point? One preventing him from making an important speech, but where he later recovers?
 
Top