For the record, the reason we don't generally see this kind of trickery with contracts is that the courts take an exceedingly dim view of it. They do not interpret them in the way that Matthew is trying to do. Ever.
+1
Sounds to me like a mob boss saying "See the scammer doesn't suffer an ... accident. Make it so." and then trying to wriggle out of responsibility, when the intention was glass clear.
The bad news is, depending where you live, even though judges will agree with the common sense interpretation, a personal bet between gentlemen is a matter of honor not law.
The interesting part now is how far the dishonor will spread by people trying to back him up, not awarding the scammer tag, and not expelling him from projects he is part of. This could seriously harm bitcointalk itself.