In Humphrey v. State, 962 P.2d 866 (Wyo. 1998), the defendant was charged with second-degree sexual assault on his daughter who lived with him, his wife, and two "spiritual" wives. The district court admitted testimony under Rule 404(b) relating to the defendant's relationship with his extended family, including instances of death threats, sexual encounters with the women in the household, and the strict discipline that was imposed by the defendant. Id. at 870. The Court affirmed, concluding that the evidence was properly admitted to show course of conduct: "We have repeatedly stated that a defendant's uncharged misconduct is admissible to demonstrate a course of conduct which clarifies what happened between an accused and the victim or serves to enhance the natural development of the facts. .The relevance of the evidence is equally patent. In this case, an essential element of the charged offenses required the State to show that Humphrey used his position of authority to cause the victim to submit. We agree with the district court that testimony illustrating the family dynamics to which this victim was subjected was clearly relevant to show Humphrey's abuse of authority." (Humphrey, 952 P.2d at 871.)