 If the victim has suffered of any financial or other prejudice there of, there is no need to establish that the defendant deceived him or her.But, following "Scott v Metropolitan Police Commissioner" (1974) 3 All ER 1032, it is necessary to prove that the victim was dishonestly deceived by one or more of the parties to the agreement into running an economic risk that he or she would not otherwise have run, if the victim has not suffered any loss.For the "mens rea", it is necessary to prove that "the purpose of the conspirators (was) to cause the victim economic loss" (per Lord Diplock in Scott).