Is the perpetrator liable for blood money (*'aql*) if the victim is the son of a paternal cousin?

Primary text

The perpetrator is liable for blood money (*'aql*) if the victim is the son of a paternal cousin. This is the apparent position of Ahmad, as stated by Al-Qadi. Furthermore, liability for blood money is established if the father or the son is a freed client (*mawla*) or a successor heir (*'asaba*) related by clientage. The evidence is that this relationship (being the son of a paternal cousin or a freed client) is a cause that stands independently to establish liability. When this cause exists alongside a relationship that normally would not establish liability (such as a simple blood tie without the specific relation mentioned), it establishes the liability. This is further supported by the fact that this relationship validates a ruling concerning marriage, even though the son (*ibn*) does not manage the marriage contract under the opposing view.