That's why you claim the bloody apron piece was a sanitary pad that Eddowes ripped off the apron she was wearing instead of using one of the 12 pieces of white rag she had on her instead. Not only that but Eddowes, the "MacGyver" of having everything but the kitchen sink on her, also had... 1 piece of old white apron with repair. Yet she has to go rip a piece of the apron she is wearing and chuck it on Goulston St. (presumably meaning she is a suspect also for the GSG while changing her sanitary conditions) before she goes off and gets herself murdered by Trevor's Carl Feigenbaum, who apparently needs to run away south towards the docks instead of up Goulston St with the bloody apron piece and into the hot zone because presumably, it's ok to just guess Feigenbaum took a Norddeutscher Lloyd Line on the ship to London in 1888 (despite the same line running to approx 10 other places around the world he could guess from) and therefore is Jack is the Ripper.
Oh yeah, and Long needs to be blamed for not seeing the bloody apron piece, AGAIN.
I think it is fantastic that today we have DNA evidence to put the dampeners on 'fitting a suspect to some of the evidence and not all of the evidence to a suspect'. Next to imprecise witness identification you can be sure that's behind plenty of those errors of putting the wrong people in jail... or worse, death row.
Bona fide canonical and then some.
You must consider the availability of a certain type of victim at a certain time of the night, that's far too complicated for the model.
Thats why geo profiling in these murders is flawed because there are different scenarios, which could equally apply to a lone killer, or more than one killer
If he was the lone killer of all the victims
1. He could have lived locally
2. He could have lived outside the area and came into kill, and then exited
3. He could have been a sailor who arrived on a ship which docked close to
Whitechapel. ( The gaps between the murders might suggest a traveler to
4. If all the victims were not killed by the same hand, again any attempt at
geo profiling is flawed because the separate killers could be from one, or
all of the aforementioned.
A geographic profile isn't supposed to predict anything definite. It's a tool. A means to an end. Like using a sniffer dog. It's statistical. Sometimes the dog signals and forensics goes into look. Sometimes forensics finds something. Sometimes it doesn't. Hit or miss. However, you go look when it signals.
The geographic profiling is sending out signals from the hot zone.
Here we have the absolutely stunning fact that a hot zone which is not supposed to predict anything other than an area where nothing much is happening from which the offender radiates out from, isn't empty at all.
In fact, it has a homicide close to it and is smack on top of a very small area of interest to JtR researchers.
That is significant. Not insignificant.
Imagine today we do a geographic profile of some cold case and find that hot zone lands very near a homicide people thought might or might not be connected. The geographic profile points at it being related.
More importantly, the murder of Tabram can explain all the others murders occurring away from her. They radiate out around from her.
There is a very good reason for this. That the radiating out from Tabram was done deliberately in order to move the attention away from this area.
This is just another piece that adds to the criteria for why Tabram is a JtR victim. The victimology is there. Now we have more evidence pointing at her being a JtR victim. It all adds up.
Nothing is pointing away from this finding. Like nothing at all. The only criticism appears to be that some people's suspects don't fit here, so they don't like it. They are welcome to that, but obviously, it doesn't make these findings grow legs and run away.
But wouldn't the same apply to Emma Smith, who was attacked close to where Tabram was murdered, even though it's far from certain she was Ripper victim? In fact, it's far from certain Tabram was either.