I've asked myself the question and while there is no direct evidence, upon reflection I vote yes, because all the circumstantial and psychological evidence points to yes.
There is, first of all, the extract cited by <PERSON>, where <PERSON> insinuates that his father had (or ought to have) known:
“You fingered <PERSON> for the <PERSON> people,” <PERSON> said, his voice flat. “That little farce you played out with my sister, did <PERSON> kid you that would fool a <PERSON>?”
Second, again as <PERSON> says, <PERSON> had never trusted <PERSON>, but knew he had to play his mistrust smart. <PERSON> was a small-time petty criminal, so initially he had hoped to keep <PERSON> on the fringes of the family, just enough so that his daughter could live comfortably and stay in the family orbit whenever she'd need him. 86
Yet he refused to intervene in <PERSON>'s physical abuse of <PERSON> not because he was unaware or didn't care but because he was fiercely aware of the dangers of intervening between a husband and a wife (something <PERSON> never understood, so much the worse for his life).
This same cunning and wisdom must surely have shown elsewhere: if he had wanted <PERSON> distant, why did he not seem to make any attempt to stop <PERSON> from making <PERSON> consigliere? The simplest explanation in my mind is that he was aware (and approved) of the Machiavellian strategy behind this move. (And by the way, it is a solid testament to <PERSON>'s credulity - whether from stupidity of breeding or rudeness of education or both - that he did not see anything suspicious in this falsely magnanimous gesture on the part of men whose previous actions had indicated clear and unambiguous contempt for him. It's also proof of <PERSON>'s wisdom in mistrusting <PERSON> not only for his bad character but also because frankly <PERSON> is a moron: unreliable on every front.)
Third, as soon as <PERSON> was aware of <PERSON>'s ploy, he put his confidants - <PERSON> and <PERSON> - on high alert. They had the means, the smarts and the motive to gather and connect all the pieces.
TL;DR: it would be extremely surprising if something like his son-in-law's involvement at the behest of his known mortal enemy in the murder of his eldest son could slip past such a man as <PERSON>. 86