Richard Oliver
I would say personally say that the person chose to disassociate or formally remove themselves as a witness. I would indicate that Paul said not to even eat with a man that was once called your brother. I would also indicate that Jesus stopped his association with Judas when he excused him from the lord's evening meal before his betrayal of the Christ.
I would indicate, that Jesus doesn't excused Judas from the lord's evening meal.
(Luke 22:19-23) 19 Also, he took a loaf, gave thanks, broke it, and gave it to them, saying: “This means my body which is to be given in YOUR behalf. Keep doing this in remembrance of me.” 20 Also, the cup in the same way after they had the evening meal, he saying: “This cup means the new covenant by virtue of my blood, which is to be poured out in YOUR behalf. 21 “But, look! the hand of my betrayer is with me at the table. 22 Because the Son of man is going his way according to what is marked out; all the same, woe to that man through whom he is betrayed!” 23 So they started to discuss among themselves the question of which of them would really be the one that was about to do this.
*** it-2 p. 130 Judas ***If the bible doesn't fit into there doctrine - the bible is the "problem".
Luke’s presentation of this incident evidently is not in strict chronological order...