I'm not sure why this should be treated as scientifically interesting in the first place... (And never mind Trek topicality!)
However, this is drastically different from most earlier accusations in one key respect. All previous theorizing has relied on circumstantial evidence: who might have been where and known whom, possessed what and been possessed by what... This case instead relies on physical evidence that comes in one (suspiciously!) neat and indivisible package.
There are three possibilities here, really:
1) Jack the Ripper has been identified.
2) Either the victim or the culprit is not genetically represented in the sample after all, and material from random other players creates the illusion that this is a valid piece of physical evidence relating to the case.
3) The whole thing is an elaborate fraud from start to finish, involving careful forgery of physical evidence.
The fourth possibility, that the piece of evidence is genuine but the DNA matching is overtly optimistic in pointing to two known players simultaneously, is not really a concern here: the house doing the analysis is a reputable one, and the levels of confidence quoted are too convincing for false positives. For both the victim and the suspect to be falsely identified in the sample, we absolutely have to plead conspiracy rather than incompetence. Peer review will not alter these arguments: only a police investigation into a fraud would.
Now, considering the nature of the case, #3 sounds a very likely scenario overall. But forging this sort of evidence is actually pretty difficult, and had this been done ten years ago, I'd argue the means would not be there. As for #2, it would be rather unlikely that a random woman's bloodied scarf would exist with the suspect's blood and semen DNA on it - what could the circumstances be, combining the creation of such an object and its ending up in the hands of the current posse?
Timo Saloniemi
)
