Oma Hamou Reality in a Nutshell

So, there's a lot of stuff here, I mean when we stumbled upon a website for a "Model, Actress, Writer and Motion Picture Producer" and wondered just what the heck this was, well, who knew what all we eventually would find.

We don't "hate" Oma Hamou. We don't even know Oma Hamou. We don't urge people to avoid doing business with her, we don't really care. All we want to do is present the reality behind all the stuff Oma Hamou writes, and boy does she write a lot. Frankly, though, nobody cares about what she writes. We ask you only to make up your own mind:

July 19: On her Forum, one of Oma Hamou's sockpuppets posted this and we felt that it was reasonable enough to ask her the same:

"You made a very straightforward assertion: To expect that assertion to be taken seriously, you have to give some support for it -- which, as usual, you refuse to do."

- Oma Hamou asserts she is an actress in film and on television. Ask her to support the assertion with specifics.
- Oma Hamou asserts she is a model. Ask her to support the assertion with specifics.
- Oma Hamou asserts she is an author. Ask her to support the assertion with specifics.
- Oma Hamou asserts she is a motion picture producer. Ask her to support the assertion with specifics.
- Oma Hamou asserts that she is a successful businesswoman. Ask her to support the assertion with specifics.
- Oma Hamou asserts that all of her debts are caused by other people and not her fault. Ask her to support the assertion with specifics.
- Oma Hamou asserts that she has the background to be a motion picture executive. Ask her to support the assertion with specifics.

As usual, Oma Hamou will refuse to offer any support for any of these assertions. Ask her why.

******************************************
New: July 15: On her "forum", Oma Hamou's friend "Justin" said this just today...:
"I also heard Dr. Sautov on a speaker phone call with Oma say he hates Bob Atchison and is disgusted with what he did to O and her projects, I heard him say O is his friend, he said a bunch more but that's enough."

WELL, that would have been VERY impossible for him to hear all that for one simple reason. Dr. Sautov, the head of the Museums in Tsarskoe Selo DOES NOT SPEAK A WORD OF ENGLISH! We found this out when we called over there a year ago and asked to speak to Dr. Sautov. This fact has also been confirmed by other people we have spoken to who know or have met Dr. Sautov.
So, What do you think of people who just make stuff up to try to prove a point? What does that make you think about the rest of their credibility?

Oma Hamou calls herself an "actress". She has no screen credits. She has no resume of her work. She refuses to even tell anyone exactly what she did as an actress.
- Now, ask yourself, do you know anyone who ever was an actor who had no credits? Do you know any actor who would not even tell anyone what their acting experience was? Does that even make sense?

Oma Hamou call herself "a writer". She has never had anything published or produced.
-Ask yourself, what do you think of someone who calls themselves a writer but never did get anything published or produced.

Oma Hamou calls herself a "Motion Picture Producer". She has no experience producing Motion Pictures. She makes nebulous statements about her "connections" and "background" but refuses to actually go into detail.
-Ask yourself, would any "producer" have no experience? Would anyone wanting to be a producer refuse to actually say what experience, background or connections they had. Does that make any sense?

Oma Hamou is a convicted Felon. She has at least three Felony convictions for writing bad checks and theft by Deception. She admits this
-Ask yourself, are you a convicted Felon? Do you know anyone who is a convicted Felon?

Oma Hamou was sentenced to thirty years total in prison, albeit suspended.
-Have you ever been sentenced to prison?

Oma Hamou violated the terms of her probation for three different sentences. She admits this.

-Has anyone you know even been placed on Felony probation much less violated the terms of that probation?

Oma Hamou has been arrested at least six times. She admits this.
-Ask yourself, have you ever been arrested? Do you know anyone who has been arrested even once?

Oma Hamou has spent about 12 months total in jail. Ask yourself, have you spent any time in jail? How many people do you know who have spent that much time in jail?
(-She denies this, so here you go:
June 20, 1991 - April 3 1992. Jail Custody in Utah = 9 months 2 weeks.
11-14-95 to 12-5-95 in Los Angeles Jail violating terms of probation in Utah.
= 3 weeks
12-5-95- 2-6-96 in Jail Custody in Utah for violating probation. = 2 months

http://web.archive.org/web/20040805172918/omahamoureport.org/OmaUtah
Note that this doesn't include unknown time in Jail in Wyoming or Montana for the Felony Arrests and Convictions there...

Since she still denies the accuracy, go there and see for yourself that it is the original file from the archives, which clearly you can see is the State of Utah Transcript of her arrest and hearing in Utah, showing her arrest dates and dates in Jail custody.


Oma Hamou has some $675,000 in judgments alone against her, not to mention numerous other lawsuits filed against her for money owed. She admits this, but also admits to refusing to pay these judgments and wants to just walk away from these judgments.
-Ask yourself, do you owe anywhere near $675,000? Do you have $675,000 in legal judgments against you? How many people do you know that have $675,000 in outstanding judgments? Would you refuse to pay judgments against you? What would you think if someone you knew admitted to refusing to pay all these judgments? How many lawsuits have been filed against you or people you know?

Oma Hamou and "cohorts" stated as fact back in early 2006: "We now know who created the Oma Hamou Reality Blog. It was handled under proper legal procedures, so that when it comes time for court (Civil/Criminal) it will be acceptable as evidence. This information is important for future legal actions." This has been repeated over and over again, for over two years now, even as recently as on May 27, 2008 when Oma Hamou wrote under her own name (for a rare change): "On their blog they pretend to be a third person and say they are not Rob Moshein or Bob Atchison, I know who the Blog belongs to because law enforcement told me.". These statements are simply not true. Under federal law, (US Code Title47, Ch. 5 SS 551) an ISP such as Google is required to notify a blogger if there has been a request for his identity even by Law Enforcement. No such request has been made and Google confirmed nobody has even asked. Oma Hamou and sockpuppets do not know who we are at all.
-Ask yourself: Do you know people who continually tell falsehoods for years, insisting their falsehoods are true, and use them as the basis for appearing credible? Do you tell falsehoods for years,insisting they are true? What kind of credibility do such people have to you? How does this affect everything else they say? What do you think about people who threaten litigation and criminal action against others for years and years, but nothing ever really happens? How does this affect their credibilty?

All the details are below, if you want to read them, its all there in the previous blog entries...

Yet Again More Oma Hamou Reality, sadly...

Seems old, getting older, Mizz Thang Oma Hamou decided to publicly reply to something we wrote the other day. We were appalled at Miss Chica's blatant arrogance, disregard for the Rule of Law, and general attitude towards her debts, including the ones she acknowledges, that we just had to show you the kind of person she is and the Oma Hamou Reality:

We wrote: "Rather a lot of people have legitimate court judgments against Mizz Thang Oma Hamou. Therefore, her "income stream" is something which these people are ENTITLED BY LAW to have an interest in. Specifically, the following people HAVE A LEGAL INTEREST IN OMA HAMOU'S "INCOME STREAM":
May 21, 2002: Judgment in the amount of $213,805 was awarded on May 21, 2002 against Oma Hamou, personally in favor of Boardrush, LLC. by the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York by the Hon. Richard. F. Braun in Index No. 01/605021 for a Default Judgment against Oma Hamou, and was filed with the Clerk's office on June 11, 2002. Oma Hamou signed a contract with Boardrush to act as her Production management firm, but never paid them the retainer she had agreed to pay under the contract she signed.

Oma Hamou responded:This judgment was obtained fraudulently. I was introduced to this organization's principal by Bob Atchison amongst other things it claimed to have spent an enormous amount of money on behalf of my film company Enigma while I was living in Russia and it had negotiated a contract on Enigma's behalf with the World Monuments Fund. The fact is it had done neither. The money this organization claimed it spent and was entitled for a reimbursement is not a true representation of the actual invoice sent to me by them. The attached document submitted to the court in NYC is not signed by both parties. I had no problem reimbursing this company for the transportation it provided or for their telephone expense what I did take issue and still do was the $50,000 non refundable rretainer fee regardless if they did nothing at all. I've been told by the Attorney General's office that criminal charges could be filed and the judgment set aside if fraud and deceptive trade practice were involved.
THE OMA HAMOU REALITY TRANSLATION OF HER WORDS:"I Oma Hamou disagree with the New York Court's ruling. It wasn't my fault, and so even though I could not be bothered to answer this lawsuit in court, when I had the chance, I don't think I have to pay it, so I'm not going to, SO I DON'T GIVE A DAMN WHAT THE NEW YORK COURT SAYS BUT I ALSO DON'T CARE ENOUGH TO ACTUALLY DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT EXCEPT PRETEND IT DOES NOT EXIST AND CERTAINLY WON'T PAY THIS JUDGMENT AGAINST ME"

We wrote October 24, 2002: Writs of Execution for Judgments in Case PC027665 in Los Angeles County Superior Court were granted for American Express Travel Related Services, to execute judgments for unpaid American Express Credit Card charges, against Enigma Royal Films, LLC, in the amount of $190,006 and $82,012; against Oma Hamou, personally in the amount of $127,155, and William Donald Morton in the amount of $15,882. William Donald Morton was the owner of Oma Hamou's Mayall Street residence, and resided there as well himself.

Oma Hamou responded: "I should start off by saying this debt is 6 years old and is in relation to Enigma, a film company I own, due to a set of unfortunate circumstances (which we can now trace substantially to Bob Atchison’s interference in my corporate affairs) we were unable to meet our financial obligations. Furthermore, pursuant to American Express, the balance owing on the account was sold to a collection agency.
THE OMA HAMOU REALITY TRANSLATION OF HER WORDS:
"I Oma Hamou acknowledge that I owe over $200,000 to American Express BUT, gee this is kind of old by now, so who cares right? ALSO, it wasn't MY FAULT I couldn't pay it, so I really don't have to, right? AND since they sold it to a collection agency because I never bothered to pay them anything for so long, well I really DON'T owe them this money anymore, right?"

We wrote: June 23, 2003: UCC Judgment lien was filed by NTT/Verio Inc. in California, filing no. 0317860421 against Enigma Films, securing Judgment against Enigma Films in the amount of $61,000. Oma Hamou had engaged NTT/Verio to design a website for Enigma Films, but never paid for the work.
Oma Hamou responded: "This web design company was hired after Bob's company Pallasart defrauded Enigma over $10, 000 I've been told by the criminal prosecutor that Pallasart could be forced to pay this amount and more if it along with Bob Atchison is found guilty of committing a crime."
THE OMA HAMOU REALITY TRANSLATION OF HER WORDS: Well, I owe these people this money for work they did at my request, but, somebody else FORCED ME TO HIRE THEM, SO REALLY EVEN THOUGH THEY DID SERVICES ON MY BEHALF AND I'VE BEEN ORDERED TO PAY THEM BY THE COURT, WELL REALLY SOMEBODY ELSE SHOULD PAY THEM, SO EVEN THOUGH THE COURT TOLD ME I HAVE TO PAY IT, WELL, I'M NOT GOING TO BOTHER."

We wrote: July 28,2003 Reed Business Information files a lawsuit in New York Supreme Court, no. 03112486 against Oma Hamou, personally dba Enigma films in the amount of $112,179 for unpaid advertising in their magazines in 2002. They are unable to have Oma Hamou served with the lawsuit as she appears to have avoided all attempts at service of process for this lawsuit.
Oma Hamou responded: Due to a set of unfortunate circumstances (which we can now trace substantially to Bob Atchison’s interference in my corporate affairs) we were unable to meet our financial obligations. It is a legitimate debt related to my film company, Enigma Films and is 5 years old. A payment was made towards our advertising expenses related to the film project, As A Matter of Honour.
THE OMA HAMOU REALITY TRANSLATION OF HER WORDS: Well, I Oma Hamou really do owe them well over $100,000, BUT it's not my fault that I couldn't pay them even though I contracted with them to purchase all those ads, which they ran, but, see it's somebody else's fault I can't pay. I mean, again it's five years old now, so even though I paid them a little bit originally, well I don't really have to pay them all this money do I? So, I Oma Hamou won't bother to pay this."

We wrote: August 5, 2003: WESTAR LEGAL ENTERPRISES, LLC. v. OMA HAMOU ET AL. Los Angeles County Superior Court Case PC033237, Breach of Contract, filed 08/05/2003, Default Judgment issued against Oma Hamou individually and dba Engima Productions for the suit originally filed on 04/23/2004 for an as yet unknown amount in excess of $10,000
Oma Hamou responded: Again, this is a legitimate debt related to Enigma Films but due to a set of unfortunate circumstances (which we can now trace substantially to Bob Atchison’s interference in my corporate affairs) we were unable to meet our financial obligations.
THE OMA HAMOU REALITY TRANSLATION OF HER WORDS: Well, yeah, I Oma Hamou actually owe them all this money, but it's not MY fault I can't pay them, its somebody else's fault, and so I'm not going to bother to pay these guys either."

We wrote: Sept. 26, 2003: FREEMAN FREEMAN & SMILEY LLP v. OMA HAMOU. LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT, West Los Angeles Case 03T02636, Breach of Contract, lawsuit filed.
Oma Hamou responded: Absolutely, this is a legitimate debt and is 5 years old related to Sarskaia a company I own due to a set of unfortunate circumstances (which we can now trace substantially to Bob Atchison’s interference in my corporate affairs) we were unable to meet our financial obligations
THE OMA HAMOU REALITY TRANSLATION OF HER WORDS: Well, heck yeah, I Oma Hamou actually owe them all this money, but it's not MY fault I can't pay them, its somebody else's fault, and so I'm not going to bother to pay these guys either."

We wrote: December 26: Global Insight,(Usa) Inc. vs. Enigma Films Inc., Sarskaia Foundation. Los Angeles Superior Court, case SC078588. Default judgment issued against Enigma Films and Sarskaia, for a debt collection case "in excess of $60,000" according to Plaintiff's attorney Jacqueline Anker.
Oma Hamou responded: Again, it is a 5 year old debt due to a set of unfortunate circumstances (which we can now trace substantially to Bob Atchison’s interference in my corporate affairs) we were unable to meet our financial obligations. To the best of my recollection the judgment obtained on behalf of Global Insight was not in excess of $60,000.
THE OMA HAMOU REALITY TRANSLATION OF HER WORDS: Well, heck yeah, I Oma Hamou actually owe them all this money, but it's not MY fault I can't pay them, its somebody else's fault. I mean, its 5 years now and I haven't paid them anything, so I don't really "have to" and gee, I don't "think" it was that much, but who cares anyway, and so I'm not going to bother to pay these guys either."

We wrote:September 27, 2005:Robert Atchison v. Oma Hamou, cause GN303141, 345th District Court of the State of Texas. After trial a jury found in favor of Bob Atchison for services he rendered on behalf of Hamou in the year 2000 and for which she never paid him in the amount of $13,859.99 plus interest. The final judgment was filed October 11, 2005.
Oma Hamou responded:Bob Atchison was able to obtain this judgment against me by committing fraud, perjury and submitting forged documents to the courts in Texas it is one of many reasons I have turned to law enforcement in an attempt to right the wrongs.
THE OMA HAMOU REALITY TRANSLATION OF HER WORDS:"I Oma Hamou disagree with the Texas's ruling. It wasn't my fault, I don't care WHAT the Court says, the Court screwed up, I didn't cre enough to challenge it though when I had the chance, and so I don't think I have to pay it, so I'm not going to, SO I DON'T GIVE A DAMN WHAT THE TEXAS COURT SAYS SO I CAN JUST PRETEND IT DOES NOT EXIST AND CERTAINLY WON'T PAY THIS JUDGMENT AGAINST ME"
AND Let us not forget the law firm of Foster Malish and Blair who have an outstanding bill for Mizz Thang Nevahwuz Oma Hamou in excess of $20,000, by her own admissions.
Oma Hamou responded: It is a legitimate 3 year old debt and is related to Bob Atchison and my Counter lawsuit with him, his web Design Company Pallasart and Rob Moshein due to a set of unfortunate circumstances (which we can now trace substantially to Bob Atchison’s interference in my corporate affairs) we were unable to meet our financial obligations.
THE OMA HAMOU REALITY TRANSLATION OF HER WORDS: Well, heck yeah, I Oma Hamou actually owe them all this money, but it's not MY fault I can't pay them, its somebody else's fault, and so I'm not going to bother to pay these guys either."


We have at LEAST $675,000 currently owed by OMA HAMOU, to ten different people/entities MININUM, all of whom have a legal right to know about Oma Hamou's "income stream"...

We wrote: ATTENTION LAW FIRMS AND ATTORNEYS OMA HAMOU APPROACHES: PAY HEED TO THESE OUTSTANDING DEBTS. OMA HAMOU APPEARS TO HAVE A BAD TRACK RECORD PAYING HER ATTORNEY'S BILLS.
Oma Hamou responded: This statement is false, defamatory & libelous
Actually, it is not any of those things. The Oma Hamou Reality is that Mizz Thang Oma Hamou admits herself to owing three different law firms well over $40,000. and we quote:
1. Foster Malish and Blair who have an outstanding bill owed by Oma Hamou in excess of $20,000, Oma Hamou admits "It is a legitimate 3 year old debt"
2. FREEMAN FREEMAN & SMILEY LLP v. OMA HAMOU. LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT, West Los Angeles Case 03T02636, Breach of Contract, lawsuit filed. Oma Hamou said: Absolutely, this is a legitimate debt and is 5 years old related to Sarskaia a company I own
3. WESTAR LEGAL ENTERPRISES, LLC. v. OMA HAMOU ET AL. Los Angeles County Superior Court Case PC033237, Breach of Contract, filed 08/05/2003, Default Judgment issued against Oma Hamou individually and dba Engima Productions for the suit originally filed on 04/23/2004 for an as yet unknown amount in excess of $10,000.
Oma Hamou said "Again, this is a legitimate debt related to Enigma Films".

Well, Mizz Thang Oma Hamou, you need to 'splain just how you can admit publicly not paying these lawyers all this money you still owe them, so you ADMIT it is NOT FALSE BUT TRUE and yet say that it is "defamatory and libel" to actually point out your admitted track record??
We'll wait...

Lets Revisit Credibility and "Deception"

OK, Miss Thang Oma Hamou and her sockpuppet "friends" all are now screaming about "deception" because some guy listed the company pet dog on the staff list as an inside joke. I mean, get a grip, does she really THINK customers are going to start screaming to get their money back for "deceptive" practices because the dog was listed? How pathetic is that?

But, we felt compelled to address the deceptive practices of one Miss Thang Oma Hamou, yet again, since SHE brought the subject up:

June 20:: Oma Hamou's good "friend" writes "she has a legitimate income stream that is hers, and it is no ones business what that is."
ACTUALLY, THIS IS NOT TRUE. Rather a lot of people have legitimate court judgments against Mizz Thang Oma Hamou. Therefore, her "income stream" is something which these people are ENTITLED BY LAW to have an interest in. Specifically, the following people HAVE A LEGAL INTEREST IN OMA HAMOU'S "INCOME STREAM":
May 21, 2002: Judgment in the amount of $213,805 was awarded on May 21, 2002 against Oma Hamou, personally in favor of Boardrush, LLC. by the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York by the Hon. Richard. F. Braun in Index No. 01/605021 for a Default Judgment against Oma Hamou, and was filed with the Clerk's office on June 11, 2002. Oma Hamou signed a contract with Boardrush to act as her Production management firm, but never paid them the retainer she had agreed to pay under the contract she signed.

October 24, 2002: Writs of Execution for Judgments in Case PC027665 in Los Angeles County Superior Court were granted for American Express Travel Related Services, to execute judgments for unpaid American Express Credit Card charges, against Enigma Royal Films, LLC, in the amount of $190,006 and $82,012; against Oma Hamou, personally in the amount of $127,155, and William Donald Morton in the amount of $15,882. William Donald Morton was the owner of Oma Hamou's Mayall Street residence, and resided there as well himself.

June 23, 2003: UCC Judgment lien was filed by NTT/Verio Inc. in California, filing no. 0317860421 against Enigma Films, securing Judgment against Enigma Films in the amount of $61,000. Oma Hamou had engaged NTT/Verio to design a website for Enigma Films, but never paid for the work.
July 28,2003 Reed Business Information files a lawsuit in New York Supreme Court, no. 03112486 against Oma Hamou, personally dba Enigma films in the amount of $112,179 for unpaid advertising in their magazines in 2002. They are unable to have Oma Hamou served with the lawsuit as she appears to have avoided all attempts at service of process for this lawsuit.
August 5, 2003: WESTAR LEGAL ENTERPRISES, LLC. v. OMA HAMOU ET AL. Los Angeles County Superior Court Case PC033237, Breach of Contract, filed 08/05/2003, Default Judgment issued against Oma Hamou individually and dba Engima Productions for the suit originally filed on 04/23/2004 for an as yet unknown amount in excess of $10,000
Sept. 26, 2003: FREEMAN FREEMAN & SMILEY LLP v. OMA HAMOU. LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT, West Los Angeles Case 03T02636, Breach of Contract, lawsuit filed.
December 26: Global Insight,(Usa) Inc. vs. Enigma Films Inc., Sarskaia Foundation. Los Angeles Superior Court, case SC078588. Default judgment issued against Enigma Films and Sarskaia, for a debt collection case "in excess of $60,000" according to Plaintiff's attorney Jacqueline Anker. Global Insight produced the "Economic Impact Statement" for her motion picture project which Hamou/Sarskaia made available as a PDF on her websites, until Global Insight demanded she cease using this report.
September 27, 2005:Robert Atchison v. Oma Hamou, cause GN303141, 345th District Court of the State of Texas. After trial a jury found in favor of Bob Atchison for services he rendered on behalf of Hamou in the year 2000 and for which she never paid him in the amount of $13,859.99 plus interest. The final judgment was filed October 11, 2005.
AND Let us not forget the law firm of Foster Malish and Blair who have an outstanding bill for Mizz Thang Nevahwuz Oma Hamou in excess of $20,000, by her own admissions.

We have at LEAST $675,000 currently owed by OMA HAMOU, to ten different people/entities MININUM, all of whom have a legal right to know about Oma Hamou's "income stream"...

SOOOOO. LOTS of people have a legitimate and legal "interest" into Oma Hamou's "income stream". SOOO, since she "has" this income. WHY does she not permit debtors exams from the people with legitimate legal judgments against her AND FESS UP AND ACTUALLY PAY THESE PEOPLE SHE OWES ALL THIS MONEY TO?

ATTENTION LAW FIRMS AND ATTORNEYS OMA HAMOU APPROACHES: PAY HEED TO THESE OUTSTANDING DEBTS. OMA HAMOU APPEARS TO HAVE A BAD TRACK RECORD PAYING HER ATTORNEY'S BILLS.

June 11: On May 27, 2008 Oma Hamou wrote under her own name (for a rare change): "On their blog they pretend to be a third person and say they are not Rob Moshein or Bob Atchison, I know who the Blog belongs to because law enforcement told me."

This statement concerned us, as it implied that Google breached their own Privacy Policy, and so we wrote and asked them if they had indeed "told law enforcement" who writes this blog. They answered.

Under federal law, (US Code Title47, Ch. 5 SS 551) an ISP such as Google is required to notify a blogger if there has been a request for his identity even by Law Enforcement. A court is then asked to consider compelling the ISP to unmask the blogger, either because an ISP files suit asking for such relief or a blogger files a John Doe suit to maintain his anonymity.

In other words, Google can NOT legally reveal the identity of a blogger even to law enforcement without first 1. TELLING the blogger of the request, then 2. Giving the blogger the opportunity to refuse the request, 3. THEN the Court has a hearing, where the blogger can be heard by the Court to ask anonymously that their identity be protected 4. The Court THEN will decide to issue the order.

In Short: There is NO circumstance short of our advocating some sort of anti government terrorist acts, WHICH WE CERTAINLY DO NOT, which would trigger Homeland Security powers where Google would tell ANYONE our identity without our first being notified and without a Court Order where we would be given the chance to be heard. EVER. We certainly never advocated any harm, physical or otherwise to Hamou. Our blog is in no way "criminal activity" as we have NEVER advocted harm to anyone, but even then, the Federal notice rules apply to Law Enforcement. In fact, we could sue Google for damages if the DO release personal information without first telling us and getting the Court order. Take that to the bank. Its Federal Law.


SO: Oma Hamou's statement that "I know who the Blog belongs to because law enforcement told me." IS WHOLLY DECEPTIVE AS IT IS NOT TRUE. GOOGLE CONFIRMED IT FOR US, SPECIFICALLY. Oma Hamou does NOT know who writes this blog, and she certainly did not get the information from Law Enforcement, as Law Enforcement has NOT asked Google.

6/16: On her blog, she or one of her sockpuppets wrote on June 15:
That is why she was in magazines, that is why she was in film and on television,

OK THEN...For about the five millionth time: EXACTLY WHICH MAGAZINES? DATES, MAGAZINE NAME, PAGE NUMBERS. IF SHE REFUSES TO ANSWER THIS, ASK WHY.
EXACTLY WHICH FILMS? TITLES, HER CHARACTER ROLES, ETC. IF SHE REFUSES TO ANSWER THIS ASK WHY.
EXACTLY WHAT TELEVISION PROGRAMS? NAMES, HER ROLES, DATE AIRED, ETC. IF SHE REFUSES TO ANSWER THIS, ASK WHY.


Since Oma Hamou wants to be Motion Picture Producer, WHAT are her SPECIFIC Motion Picture Credits and work experience that support this contention?

Who SPECIFICALLY are her alleged "numerous Industry contacts"? Names, phone numbers please.

What SPECIFIC Motion Picture experience gives Oma Hamou the background to produce a Motion Picture?

Oma Hamou says she is an Actress. WHAT are her specific screen/stage credits, appearances etc?? IF she refuses to answer this specifically, WHY does she refuse?

Since Oma Hamou desires to STAR in her film, WHAT specific acting background and credentials support this? IF she refuses to answer publicly, WHY the refusal?

Oma Hamou says she is a MODEL. WHAT are her specific credits, publications, experience, etc?? IF she refuses publicly to answer this, WHY does she refuse?

Oma Hamou is a convicted Felon. What are ALL of her specific convictions, with date and place? IF she refuses to provide this public information, WHY?

How many times has Oma Hamou been arrested? when, where and for what? IF she refuses.. WHY?

She has said that she and her companies have no income. WHY does Oma Hamou not inform business people with whom she contracts that she has no income?

Oma Hamou maintains a "foundation", Sarskaia, which is listed as a non profit charitable foundation.WHAT specific charitable works has this foundation provided? IF she refuses to account to the public for this, WHY??

Oma Hamou says she is a busy Motion Picture Producer. Oma Hamou has no offices, no business address other than a cheap Pak n Mail PO box drop, no business telephone and no Federal or California Employer ID numbers (required to actually have the "employees" she says she has).

Oma Hamou TOLD Dunn & Bradstreet in a report she filed that Enigma Royal Films was started in 1999 and operated as a film production company with 100 employees, operating out of a 5,362 sq. ft. three story building at the rear of her residence on Mayall Street in Northridge CA. She also tells D&B that she was in the process of leasing space at 100 Universal City Dr. (Universal Studios). Dunn & Bradstreet investigations concluded that Enigma Royal Films was not registered until just Sept. 14, 2000, not 1999 as she claimed. Further, the property management company for 100 Universal City Drive had no record of her "being in the process of leasing space there. Additional investigation by them showed that there was no three story 5,362 building at the rear of her Mayall Street residence and that there was no evidence of any employees. IN short she said DECEPTIVE THINGS TO DUNN & BRADSTREET FOR REPORTS PEOPLE MIGHT RUN ABOUT HER.

Oma Hamou SAID she had offices in Russia, in the town of Pushkin and published an adddress to make it appear she HAD Russian offices, for years according to the internet archived files. The Oma Hamou reality was that the building was then and still is a vacant ruin. The Orthodox Church which owns the building had given Oma Hamou an agreement six years ago that IF she restored the building, THEN she could use it for offices. The Oma Hamou Reality is that since she did NOTHING to restore the building in the last six years, she has never had offices there.

Oma Hamou used a Camden Drive Beverly Hills address for years, calling it her "offices". I went by there, went upstairs, spoke to the manager. She remembered Hamou well. Hamou NEVER had a permanent office there. The place is a self admitted mail drop, where they will answer one of several hundred phone lines with your "business" name, and you can rent a little cubicle, desk or meeting room on an as needed basis. HOW DECEPTIVE IS THIS?

Hamou said publicly "I was the director at this specific shoot. I have never issued a check to “Wild West Productions”." See, we got the name wrong of the studio. Oma Hamou wrote checks on a long closed account to Monique Hahn, the make up artist, the studio where the shoot took place AND the Director of the shoot. Notice she puts the name in quotes, the reality is that she DID issue a bad check to the studio at that specific shoot, but tap dances around that reality. That wasn't deceptive??

We like this one: She posted a letter from Westar Legal Enterprises to prove her point about something, WELL seems she forgot to mention this too...
August 5 2003: WESTAR LEGAL ENTERPRISES, LLC. v. OMA HAMOU ET AL. Los Angeles County Superior Court Case PC033237, Breach of Contract, filed 08/05/2003, Default Judgment issued against Oma Hamou individually and dba Engima Productions for the suit originally filed on 04/23/2004 for an as yet unknown amount in excess of $10,000

and THIS chick has the audacity to scream about a guy putting a dog's name into the staff roster of his business as a joke?? I need to shower...