Atheists: Does a dying declaration tend to be more trustworthy?

First, I'm atheist myself, I'm in law school, and currently taking a class in Evidence, which is about what kinds of things and statements can be admitted in a trial to be considered by the jury). The issue of dying declarations came up and I thought it was kind of interesting, hence this question.

A dying declaration is an exception to the hearsay rule (which generally makes out of court statements inadmissible as evidence because of trustworthiness concerns and the fact that the person making the statement cannot be cross examined). The dying declaration exception allows statements made by a person while believing that his or her death is imminent, concerning the cause or circumstances of of the person's (believed) impending death, into evidence at trial.

This rule dates back to 12th century England and is founded on a Christian belief that a person's fear of dying with an unabsolved mortal sin on his soul (here, a lie) would be enough to guarantee the trustworthiness of the statement (sufficient to be admitted into evidence into trial). In contrast, the textbook offers an excerpt that claims the rule never worked well in India (during British occupation) because of cultural ideas that conclude the opposite.

Modern courts struggle with a secular rationalization of the rule. My professor stated that one rationale would be that it would be odd for a dying person to blame someone else for their death instead of who they truly thought to be responsible. Of course you can imagine some scenarios in which a vindictive person would do something like that.

Back to my question: as an atheist who doesn't believe in an afterlife or god(s), would you regard a dying declaration to be more trustworthy than regular testimony? Less trustworthy? Or prone to the same sorts of concerns (trustworthiness, sincerity, etc) that all testimony faces?

Personally, I would need other evidence to make a conclusion whether a dying declaration is truthful or not. I wouldn't automatically think that imminent death (a requirement for meeting the dying declaration exception to the hearsay rule) necessarily makes a statement more trustworthy. I don't think such statements should be admitted into court just based on the fact that they were made when the person faced imminent death.

What do you think?