How is a dispute between the injurer and the victim/guardian resolved regarding the scope of pardon for an injury?

Primary text

If the injurer claims, "I pardoned absolutely," while the victim claims, "I pardoned only in exchange for monetary compensation (Diyah)," or if the victim claims, "I pardoned the initial injury but not any subsequent complications arising from it," the statement of the victim or guardian is accepted as true. This is because the default state is that full retaliation remains obligatory, and the victim's admission of pardoning only part of the claim (the initial injury or only up to a monetary settlement) necessitates accepting their definition of the pardon's limit.