Is a defendant permitted to explain to the jury why he is accused of sexually assaulting a minor?

Defendant claims that he was not permitted to explain the alleged incidents, citing People v. Zerillo, 36 Cal.2d 222, 230, 223 P.2d 223. The principle referred to in People v. Zerillo, Supra, has nothing to do with this case. There evidence of other crimes was admitted on the merits. Here the questions were asked for the sole purpose of testing the character witness. The court instructed the jury concerning the limited purpose for which the evidence had been admitted. (CALJIC No. 2.42.) There was no error.