The Murder of an Exclusive Brethren

Why has no arrest ever been made in this case?

The murder of Esther Soper remains unsolved with no fresh clues decades on, but why?

Esther Soper was a much-loved mother and grandmother with apparently no enemies, yet she was killed in cold blood in her own home on New year’s day 1976.

This is a far more interesting and complex case than it first appears and I am absolutely satisfied that we can dismiss any theory of a robbery that went wrong. So let’s take a look at what we know just from media reports then I will try to take things further.

The brutal murder of 51-year-old Esther Soper really shocked the people of the City of Plymouth in Devon UK as there just seemed to be no reason for such a dreadful killing. A major manhunt was initiated but very unusually no one was ever questioned in connection with this killing, just pause and let that sink in a moment. Yes very unusually nobody was ever questioned about this dreadful murder, no arrests, no charges, doesn’t make sense.

Esther was a very quiet lady who lived alone in a terraced house at 9 Trematon Terrace, Mutley Plain, Plymouth. She didn’t really socialise outside of her incomparable and somewhat reclusive community. This lady had moved to Mutley Plain after the death of her husband where she had joined The Exclusive Brethren, the strictest order of The Plymouth Brethren Christian Church.

Unfortunately, it is not clear whether Mrs Soper was already a member of The Plymouth Brethren before she moved to Mutley or not, but it seems likely as it is not the kind of church that welcomes outsiders. The church or ‘cult’ (as is a more appropriate description) is very exclusive and the kind of organisation whose members are born into it, rather than joining later. Whichever way I am of the opinion that there is almost certainly a definite link between the “church” and Esther Soper’s murder.

Esther Soper was found by two of her fellow Exclusive Brethren after she failed to turn up for a church meeting early in the morning. She was a very dedicated and regular attendee to the church so obviously, her absence was noticed. The two fellow Christians made their way to Esther’s home and found the front door unlocked, the scene that greeted them was not a pleasant one

The 51-year-old had suffered what was described by police as a “frenzied attack”, she had been bludgeoned to death with a glass Cider bottle and had been strangled with her own tights, she had been wrapped in curtains and left on the floor. I’m not at all sure why the tights were used as it seems the vicious blows to her head were more than enough to kill her, maybe some kind of sexual deviancy.

I have researched cases whereby a particular form of sexual deviancy means that a person gets ‘a kick’, massive arousal from seeing a person strangled particularly underwear or hosiery such as tights or stockings. There is a particular sexual perversion known as Hypoxyphilia associated with multiple paraphilias, with many cases of murder and manslaughter resulting from acts such as strangulation. I am not going to labour on this point as it may not bear any connection but it is worth noting in this and other similar cases.

Coming back to the matter in hand I have several questions which just don’t seem to have answers but nonetheless, I feel are very relevant to this murder that has remained unsolved for over 42 years. First off I find it most interesting that of the few articles I have been able to find it interests me that pretty much from the outset of each one the stories talk a lot of Esther Soper’s connections to The Exclusive Brethren.

Now whilst I accept it may be quite important to mention within an article a little of the victim’s connection to a specific religion it is by no means necessary to mention it in maybe eight or nine times in a single small news story. Were the news reporters trying to tell the readers something without actually making an allegation perhaps?

I do understand that all of us have to take great care when publishing articles in order not to risk facing a claim for defamation so I do wonder whether the journalists were trying to highlight their feelings by overcompensating with the number of mentions of Esther’s religious life in their articles.

Now it seems that Mrs Soper lived alone as she was a widow and had lived that way since her husband’s sudden death, but the rules of the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church, particularly the Exclusive brethren of which she was a member do not permit anyone to live alone. I am a little confused by this, although there may be a simple explanation and the rule may not apply to widows and widowers, so far I am unable to find a definitive answer to that. Perhaps if anyone reading this article is able to clarify this point I would love to hear from you.

Esther Soper was actually in the process of trying to sell her house in Mutley Plain when the murder took place and it was thought that the killer may have been someone that came under the guise of viewing the property. I know that in the early days of the murder enquiry police were lead to believe that a man known as ‘Clifford Sparks’ had been to view the house just a few days prior to the murder and had arranged to do a second viewing on New Year’s Day.

Mysteriously ‘Clifford Sparks’ was never found and no connection was ever established between Esther Soper and a person of that name. The media say that in the 1970s it was a common practice of estate agents to ‘make up’ names for potential buyers, though I fail to see why. The only possible reason for such behaviour that comes to mind is making sellers believe that more potential buyers were interested in a property than actually were. Whichever way Mr Sparks was never found and despite a great deal of investigation on the police’s part, there was little or no information to assist the murder investigation.

Did someone from Esther Soper’s church maybe take umbrage at the fact she was moving away? Was she trying to leave the Exclusive Brethren perhaps? Many people have done so when they found that they couldn’t take the controlling ways, the draconian rules set down in the church’s doctrine. I am not convinced that there is no connection. During a case, review in 2004even a retired detective told a local paper “Esther Soper was part of the Plymouth Brethren and so didn’t socialise with the rest of the community much”.

That statement suggests to me that he was hinting that Esther Soper’s church and religious beliefs held a connection to the investigation. Why else would he make such a point? There had after all been suggestions that the murder had simply been a burglary that went wrong but why was a burglar carrying a large glass cider bottle with him?

The killer clearly brought the murder weapon with him as no other alcohol was found in the house and although members of the Exclusive Brethren do drink alcohol in small amounts, so far as I can ascertain Esther Soper did not use alcohol at all.

So, the house was found in a messed-up kind of state, described as “appearing ransacked” but I am of the opinion that things may well have been set up that way deliberately. I feel it is important to keep in mind that this murder happened sometime during New Year’s Day, things would have been pretty quiet in Plymouth and the houses were terraced so any noise would have very much been audible through party walls.

It is very likely that Esther would have let her killer in as there is no record of any sign of forced entry on 9 Trematon Terrace, which obviously indicates she either knew the person or thought he or she was a potential buyer or the house, This takes us back to the reasoning that this lady was a devoted Exclusive Brethren and therefore would not have invited any visitor to her home that was not also from the same religious denomination as the doctrine of the Exclusive Brethren is that people that are not from their church are deemed ‘unclean’ and by inviting an ‘unclean’ person into her home that would have deemed Eather Soper’s home ‘unclean’ and she would have been punished by the cult. She would also not have invited any lone male into her home, not even to view it as she knew this would break the rules in a big way.

So let’s get this clear, a person or persons unknown go to a terraced house in a fairly quiet street, where neighbours from both sides could have seen and heard anyone visiting. There is a hefty glass or stoneware Cider bottle carried with the visitor(s), which is used as a weapon to bludgeon this 51-year-old Christian to death. No noise or argument is heard, no sign of anyone breaking in or forcing their way in and that killer then leaves again unseen and makes a clean getaway on New Years Day?

Police apparently carry out a thorough murder investigation with some 80 officers working on the case but no clues are unearthed, no suspects are found and there are no reasonable explanations as to why Esther Soper was murdered.

The case has been reviewed several times and more recently Mrs Soper’s clothing was sent for forensic analysis and to try to trace the possible DNA of the killer but apparently, the laboratory reported that the only DNA found on the clothing was that of Esther Soper. Now, this seems even more curious this must indicate that the killer may be had also worn gloves or other hand covering as he or she obviously tied the tights used to strangle the victim and wielded the Cider bottle weapon. The heavy weapon was left at the scene and I would assume also retained as an exhibit in the murder enquiry.

So, who killed Esther Soper and why? Well, my submission is that based on limited evidence I would suggest that there was almost definitely a link to someone from the Exclusive Brethren, sadly I have no idea who.

The evidence that I have presented here certainly seems clear, Esther would not have let anyone in her house that was not known to her, except possibly a potential buyer and even that seems unlikely and if she had been wanting to sell up and move away then that suggests that she may well have been looking to escape the bonds of the Exclusive Brethren.

I will be bringing some more revelations about this very “unusual” religious cult very soon including looking into the involvement of certain parliamentary ministers in crime that have been seen to assist in re-establishing the charity status of this organisation, but that is for another day and another blog.

Let’s just say I believe that those that needed to know who was responsible for the murder of Esther Soper know and have known for many years, but something or someone stops that from becoming public knowledge

Here’s Part 2

The most important factor here is that this dreadful murder was committed in 1976 and remains unsolved to this day. The original 1976 enquiry lasted some 7 months with many man-hours dedicated to it by some 80 officers of Devon & Cornwall Police.

This is where things seem to really not make sense, in the many cases that I have studied there have usually been at least an arrest or two and definitely, people questioned about the crime, but not in the case of quiet unassuming Esther Soper.

Mrs Soper was a 51-year-old widow who didn’t really associate much with other members of her local community due to her religious beliefs. She was a mother and grandmother with a very deep dedication to her religious life as a member of the Exclusive Plymouth Brethren Christian Church. Yet someone took this peace-loving lady’s life sometime during 1st January 1976.

Esther had been widowed two or three years prior to her murder when her husband died at quite a young age, he had worked in the dockyard at Devonport. I am unable to comment as to whether his employment had any connection to his death, but there are certainly no reports to suggest that. She was estranged from her father and had not seen or spoken with him in 15 years prior to her murder due to her religious beliefs.

Stanley Copeman, Esther’s father told the Plymouth Herald newspaper that he had been out of touch with his daughter for 15 years since her mother passed away and he married again. I am not clear as to whether he had at some stage maybe also been a member of the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church or not, but according to a very reliable source, I have recently been assured that Esther was a long term member of the church, so I can only draw an inference that he may well have been, whether she was actually born into it I can be certain, though many are.

Mr Copeman told the newspaper that he could not understand why anyone would want to kill his daughter, as “she was a truly lovely person”.

According to local newspapers, Esther Soper moved to the house in Mutley Plain, Plymouth in which she was later murdered after her husband Norman passed away. I am reliably informed that the local media were wrong in stating that “Esther joined the Exclusive church after, her husband’s death”. In fact, both Esther and Norman Soper had been long time dedicated Exclusive Brethren. It seems that the media may also have been wrong about the suggestion that she moved to Mutley Plain after her husband’s death if there is anyone out there with evidence to confirm that do please get in touch. If it is the case that so many inaccuracies appeared in the press then it is no surprise that the case has never been solved.

As some of you may know the Exclusive Brethren/Plymouth Brethren Christian Church are very close-knit and austere, they are mostly born into the church and from Brethren families, with only very few members ever joining from the “outside world”, I believe that was not always the case and some did join years back but I can’t see how it would be possible now with the huge changes a member joining would have to make.

The brutal New Year’s Day murder of 1976 is said to have really stunned the people of Plymouth, Devon and sent a considerable shockwave through the Exclusive Brethren Church community. There was and still is no real explanation as to why this Christian lady who lived a very quiet life and attended church meetings on pretty much every day of the week was murdered. So why is there potentially still a vicious killer walking the streets of Plymouth some 44 years after the crime?

From police accounts, the murder was a very brutal and frenzied attack with Esther being beaten to death with at least one heavy glass Cider bottle then strangled with her own tights. There were reports stating that there were signs of ransacking within the house suggesting some kind of “Burglary that went wrong” an opportunist kind of killing but I don’t feel that at all. If anything I would say that the appearance of “ransacking” may have deliberately been created as a kind of decoy, to mislead detectives.

I definitely do not buy into the theory of a botched robbery, after all, there would be very little of value to steal as members of the Exclusive Brethren are not allowed to own such things as televisions, radios or hi-fi/stereo systems and there has never been any record made of property having been taken.

There were no signs of any forced entry, neither was there any indication from forensic reports that Esther Soper had put up any sort of fight to defend herself. The body was found wrapped in curtains taken from the house, despite being fully dressed.

A criminologist point of view on this is that the murderer may have felt some remorse after the killing, embarrassed, a sense of shame may be, so grabbed the curtains wrapped the body up and hide her away. In a sense couldn’t see her or see what he/she had done so in his/her head hadn’t done it.

As to the strangulation with tights, a criminologist view on that:

Although there seemed to be no report of a sexual assault the assailant could have derived great sexual pleasure from the act of strangulation itself, especially using female under-garments. Maybe in the killer’s childhood, he/she may have been belittled by the mother and this act was a way to take back power, hence the reason to kill using the heavy bottle first.

Very interesting stuff in my opinion as this would possibly lead to the identification of a suspect and demonstrates to us the amazing skill of understanding the criminal mind.

Anyway coming back into the story, Esther Soper was found by two fellow Christian Brethren members of her church and the sight that met them must have been pretty horrific but, I have one small question here, which I am yet to discover the answer to and that is “How did they get in”? This lady lived alone and according to police reports “there was no sign of a break-in” so was the front door simply unlocked perhaps? If it was unlocked then that would obviously suggest a way that the killer made his/her entry and exit. I was given to believe at one stage that the door was unlocked but, this is now not certain.

I know that I mentioned in my last blog on this case that Esther Soper lived alone and I questioned that as I am aware that the Exclusive Brethren do not allow people to live alone, especially women but, since I began my research I have in fact discovered that it was at least partly this murder that prompted that ruling to be made.

After the murder, the organisation decided to bring in the rules of not living alone in order to in some way reduce the risk of such single dwellers potentially being harmed in the future. I am not really sure whether the murder was in fact just a reason to enforce another rule as in accordance with other Exclusive Brethren rules a wife would be alone a lot whilst her husband was out at work so the risk would be similar.

I can’t help but pose one or two questions that I feel may never be answered and certainly, they are not clarified in the media.

Firstly I find it very interesting that of the few articles that seem to be in the public domain via the internet there are a great many mentions of the Exclusive Brethren aka the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church, every article talks somewhat excessively about Esther Soper’s connection and dedication to the organisation. None of the articles that I have been able to find have been particularly lengthy and have each contained several sentences pertaining to Esther’s involvement with the church.

Even when talking of the crime in a case review in 2004, a retired police detective told a local newspaper that “Esther Soper was part of the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church, so did not socialise with many people from the local community”.

Why would a detective make a specific point of saying that? I don’t personally see the relevance, after all the Exclusive church and its members kept themselves very much private and by the officer’s admission ‘she did not involve herself with the everyday community’. Maybe I am reading something into that statement that isn’t there, but my opinion is that the officer must have suspected something that he was not saying.

I thought that there may be a poignant clue in the murder weapon being a cider bottle as Esther Soper was a devout Christian but I feel that it may not be so important to the case now. It does still seem that the killer may well have brought the weapon into the house with malice aforethought.

I was originally under the impression that as Christians, members of the Exclusive Brethren would not drink alcohol, but I have been advised that in fact many of them drink alcohol and according to some sources it has been said that quite a large number abuse alcohol and the cult as a whole use it as a bonding tool with fellow members. Children are by all accounts encouraged to drink alcohol on a regular basis, taking wine during communion on a daily basis from as young as 18 months old.

Anyway, my apologies; So we have a very quiet lady, who was very exclusive about her friends due to her religious beliefs, living alone, attending daily prayer meetings yet on New Year’s Day she is murdered in a terraced house in Plymouth, Devon.No one saw anyone arrive or leave the house and there is no evidence to suggest that the neighbours heard anything through the party walls either. then having done the terrible deed, left the weapon behind (to be discovered and ultimately examined by the police) the killer made a getaway completely unseen, very mysterious indeed.

In the lead up to the murder, Mrs Soper had been trying to sell her house in Trematon Terrace and had arranged several viewings; in particular, a viewing which was said to have been arranged by a male known as “Clifford Sparks” for New Years Day 1978. Interestingly this man had apparently viewed the house a few days previous and had requested a second viewing but despite thorough police investigations the elusive “Mr Sparks” has never been identified or located.

There was a ‘story’ suggested that back in the 1970s estate agents had a habit of using fake names for viewings, presumably to make the vendor think that there was more interest in their property than there actually was. This story seems a little far fetched, I have certainly not been able to find any corroboration for this practice. Maybe if anyone reading this knows if this was once a ‘tactic’ used by the estate agency profession you can get in touch and let me know.

There is another very relevant issue in regard to Esther Soper selling her home and the factor that she was a devoted Exclusive Brethren and that is in order to comply with the strict rules of her church I don’t think she would invite people that were not from her religious persuasion into her house not even to view it, although she may have to unless a member of her own sect wanted it. Certainly, as a woman alone she would not have had any man in her house without being accompanied, would she? I am sure this would be a massive ‘no-no’. Inviting people that were not members of the Exclusive Brethren into the house would surely have deemed her house “unclean” which would have meant she was also “unclean” and that may have lead to her being looked down upon by the cult.

So let’s put our eyes on a different angle, still focusing on the victim’s religion but from a different angle, I am just wondering if there were any other members of the Exclusive Brethren threatened or even attached in or around Plymouth in 1975 /76, it just occurs to me that due to the somewhat “idiosyncratic” reviews of the church, a sinister someone may just have sought to try to scare the movement into either changing their policies or possibly leaving the area altogether.

I mean there have been suggestions put forward that say that Esther Soper was simply moving house in order to downsize from a 5 bedroomed property to somewhere smaller, but then why buy such a large property just a few years before when her husband passed away? Of course, if she has had lived there all along as has been suggested then, of course, that is explained Maybe she had her daughter live with her at Trematon Terrace at first or maybe she was under pressure to move out and she hadn’t gone quick enough to satisfy a particular person? Just a thought.

One thing that really does interest me, in this story, is that by 1997 there had been a good deal of progress in forensic science and as a result, Esther’s clothes were sent off to be examined and analysed by scientists, with a particular hope of finding “alien DNA” on them from the killer.

After thorough examination scientists reported that only DNA from Mrs Soper had been present on all items. Once again this is most suggestive of the murder being a deliberate and planned attack as the killer must have had to tie the tights used for strangulation so they would have been handled a great deal. The murderer must have gone to a great deal of trouble to not leave any identifying marks, prints, etc on the garments.

So, who killed Esther Soper, the nice, quiet and deeply religious lady on New Years Day 1976 and more to the point, why? Well from my research and communication with reliable contacts my submission is that one way or another I see that the killing has to have been connected to her Exclusive religious beliefs. I also believe that the identity of the killer has been known for some years but, those that know have chosen not to come forward. Whether not releasing that information has happened because of the fear of repercussions or being “paid off” to withhold it, I am not sure.

I would absolutely love to hear your thoughts on this case so please do get in touch if you wish, you will not be identified in any way unless of course, you are responsible for a crime.

I will leave this one there and as always just say that if you do have any information about this murder that could lead to the killer being identified and ultimately the case solved then get in touch with Crimestoppers 0800 555 111 or contact them online in absolute confidentiality.