He had a verbal agreement that if he testified in a civil trial against him it couldn't be used against him in criminal court. The DA agreed to this because he didn't think there was enough evidence to win in criminal court and at least the victims could get something from the ordeal this way. He could have refused to testify otherwise, although in civil court (unlike criminal) juries can use refusal to testify to assess guilt, so he maybe would have been found responsible anyway.
The DA that made that deal left and the new one decided to go back on the promise.
On appeal they ruled that he shouldn't have been able to be charged and dismissed it in a way where he can't be charged for the same charges again. When he was convicted his charges were almost at the statute of limitations and it's unlikely there are recent enough charges to file.
|