Had the apron been sliced straight down the middle as you have suggested in the past then the GS piece would have the other string attached and identification of the two pieces coming from the same piece made even more easier.
When did I suggest that, Trevor? The apron was likely cut in an uppar and a lower portion. He pulled at the bottom part, and cut straight through the middle. You will find that is the likeliest way to cut, since you must pull hard on the cloth before you can cut it. Marrying yourself to the idea that the inquest clerk must have been right about the one string is silly, since it seems he could not hear the word "portion", mistaking it for "corner".
I believe it may have been me who once suggested the apron was cut down the middle, in an attempt to make it fit all the known details.
It seems the easiest way to start a cut - just slip the knife under the waistband and slice. You wouldn't even need to use the other hand to pull the cloth taut, the strings would provide the tension. Then just cut one string free and you have one piece of apron to wipe your hands/knife/organ on, and another still "attached" to the body with a single string in one corner. This would also mean that the apron remaining with the body would be likely to have become separated during the move to the mortuary, thus leading to it being listed as a possession rather than an item of clothing. Also, didn't her other skirts have a similar cut to the waistbands?
That said, it was only a suggestion. And the only press description I've found describes the apron as being cut into upper and lower parts, so probably not a correct one.