The title already expresses the question perfectly well, so I don't see much point in complicating the question further, beyond including a few thought-provoking examples below:
Example 1: The Varginha UFO incident, where three Brazilian girls witnessed an alien-like creature (source 1, source 2). Are these Brazilian girls, who (purportedly) witnessed this creature, justified in believing they witnessed an alien-like creature based on their direct personal experience? If they are, would another random person X be justified in believing the girls witnessed an alien-like creature based on their testimony?
Example 2: Purported cases of miracles (sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5). If a person personally experiences a profoundly physicalism-defying extraordinary experience (i.e., a miracle), would they be justified in believing that they have experienced/witnessed a miracle? If they are, would another random person X be justified in believing in miracles based on their testimony?
Example 3: Bigfoot sightings. If a person witnesses a huge unknown beast in the midst of a forest, which makes a lot of noise and then climbs up a tree and disappears, and it turns out that the beast looked a lot like what people used to describe as Bigfoot, would such a person be justified in believing in Bigfoot? If they are, would another random person X be justified in believing in Bigfoot based on their testimony?
Example 4: The experience of the sense of sight (looking through one's eyes, the thing you are presumably doing right now as you look at your screen). If a person personally experiences the sense of sight through their eyes, would they be justified in believing that they are having visual experiences of external objects? If they are, would another random person X who is blind from birth be justified in believing in the existence of the sense of sight based on their testimony?