Thanks for letting me know about this part of the ruling, which was not mentioned in any of the newspaper articles I read. Cosby's case had set a very important precedent by allowing victims of other crimes to testify. Ordinarily, this is not permitted, and with good reason. But sexual assault cases almost always involve only two witnesses, the victim and the perpetrator. If testimony about related assaults is inadmissable, it will almost always let the perpetrator go free, as the testimonies of the two witnesses cancel each other out. The Cosby ruling had changed that, and overturning that ruling apparently restores the old status quo

Do you know the exact words of this part of the rulling? I'd appreciate your posting them.