You read the whole story. Propaganda? Really?
And read the links within the article. This article has facts and figures to back up the numbers.
"In 2011 and 2012, the four branches of the armed forces had 12,881 cases of child abuse and neglect reported, 67 of them leading to the death of a child. More than 750 were sexual assault cases" (two year's data).
"In the Navy alone, 42 children died from abuse and neglect from 2008 to 2012". (five year's data)
"From 2009 to 2012, the Navy had 3,336 child abuse and neglect cases. (four year's data)".
It is obvious to me that the writer is implying that the Navy has a worse record of child/abuse cases than the other three branches of the military (e.g. "In the Navy alone...").
However, by normalizing all of the reported data over a two year period, one can see that the Navy does not experience more than its statistical "share" (25%) of child abuse/neglect-related deaths; and that it experiences far less than its "share" of total child abuse/neglect cases.
42 child abuse deaths over 5 years "normalizes" to 16.8 deaths over a two year period. 16.8 is almost exactly 25% of 67 (67 being the reported total number of child abuse-related deaths among all four branches of the military during the two-year period 2011 and 2012).
3,336 total child abuse and neglect cases over four years means that the Navy could expect 1,668 such cases over a two year period. 1,668 is about 13% of 12,881. Thus, upon further examination, it appears the Navy has fewer such instances, on average, than the other three branches of the military.
This, of course, has NOTHING to do with the actual guilt or innocence of the individual who was the subject of the story - but in my opinion this fact makes the "yellow journalism" label even more justified. The writer does nothing but muddy the water with his/her "statistics"
PS - For the record, if he is guilty then I think he deserves to die.
What are the numbers?