Of course the answer is that such evidence is as reliable as the evidence of anyone who is emotionally involved with the subject matter. In a court of law, emotional involvement is taken into account, but does not disqualify the testimony, especially if the testimony is corroborated. This is why ex-premie.org tries to ensure that the testimony of ex-premies is corroborated, and also includes Rawat's own speeches which cannot be accused of bias. By pointing to Rawat's undisputed officially published words, it no longer matters whether the person quoting those words is a current follower, an ex-follower, or the reserve goalkeeper for York City Football Club, Rawat's words stand as incontrovertible evidence of the past.

Here is an example:-

"A devotee will follow their Guru Maharaj Ji wherever Guru Maharaj Ji goes and not be involved in anything else."

And here is another:-

"Who is Guru? The highest manifestation of God is Guru. So when Guru is here, God is here, to whom will you give your devotion? I want that the general should sign some papers. I need not go to his office when he is sitting in my home. Is it necessary to go in his office when his is sitting in my home? When God has come here, then what is the need to give devotion to God there?"

So let's forget these arguments about the reliability of apostates' testimony, and discuss the reliability of Rawat's testimony. If his words are to be trusted, then we should all dedicate our lives to him; and if not, then at best he should be ignored, at worst imprisoned or committed to a psychiatric hospital.

And this is not based on apostates' testimony, but Rawat's own words.