I think she did testify about their sex practices, and photos of the bondage equipment that she collected from around their house were photographed and entered as evidence. The defense has the right to cross-examine, presumably with the goal to argue that he did not know that she did not consent on the night in question. That would require asking the witness more detailed questions about who said what, what happened, how that was different from other consensual times. The defense most likely wants to demonstrate that what happened on the night in question was no different than other nights when the ropes and so on were not a problem. I'm just speculating on why the questioning will be allowed. I'm not 100% clear on what happened last week, but I think Coleman expressed discomfort with the questioning, suggesting that it was too similar to her time in captivity, even though it was done outside a courtroom and with a support person. I'm unclear on whether the questioning was scaled back again, perhaps allowing her to testify from her home, or whether there was a voir dire to determine whether the questioning violated other law. Maybe someone else understood this better. There was no news for a few days, and then the decision that she could be questioned about the history of their consensual sex practices was delivered. That came with an announcement that the trial could be delayed for a long time because of an appeal by her lawyer and the prosecutor regarding the decision. Boyle is facing very serious charges, and is entitled to defend himself. Coleman has told her story, and now Boyle probably wants to ensure that she told the whole story.