BBC bodyguard set fire to dead tsunami baby because he thought it posed a risk to the reporting team | Mail Online Not sure on this one... mainly because the story doesn't seem to be adding up. The state of the body seems to be beyond recognition by the end of the story, yet at the begining it doesn't seem that bad. He 'may' have left a skull on the floor, they just wanted it done, but the whole point of the burning was to remove a possible biological vector? But we'll just leave a skull on the floor? Perhaps this was just something that should have been left out of the book and consigned to the murk of history? And away from the TV licence paying citizens.