In Story v. State, 721 P.2d 1020 (Wyo. 1986), the Court reversed a conviction for assault and battery with intent to rape based on our conclusion that the trial court's restriction on cross-examination of the victim and only corroborating witness was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The Court said: "It would be impossible for us to conclude that the trial court's restrictions on defense counsel's cross-examination of HF and MF were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. HF's accusation was not corroborated by any physical evidence or by the testimony of any witness other than MF. The jury's decision that appellant assaulted and battered HF with intent to rape her was based entirely on the testimony of HF and MF. Their credibility was crucial to the prosecution's case." (Id. at 1040.)