FROM THE OMA HAMOU REALITY BLOG FRIDAY, JULY 24, 2009
Anatomy of a Con: The Oma Hamou Story
The following was sent to us. We thought it was well written and of interest to the subject.

WE DID NOT WRITE THIS PIECE. WE CAN NOT GUARANTEE THAT IT IS THE TRUTH. You are free to decide for yourself what you believe.

I find it highly unlikely that this was actually “sent” since it seems very much like the writings of Bob Atchison and his obsessive attempts to destroy Oma.

Anatomy of a Con:

The Oma Hamou Story


On November 2, 2008 a woman named Alexandra Oma McConnell was arrested in San Bernardino County, California for felony forgery. For the next six weeks Ms. McConnell, who was also living as Alexandra Murphy, sat in jail with bail set at one million dollars. Today she is in pre-trial proceedings on that felony charge.

Oma was not arrested on November 2, 2008. This date is incorrect, as are so many of the libelous claims of Rob Moshein and Bob Atchison about Oma Hamou.

Over the years, Ms. McConnell has gone by many names, including Oma Demian, Oma Ashkenazy, Oma Chedid, Rebecca Taylor, Taylor Jordan, and variants. But the name she most preferred – and the name under which this story unfolds – is Oma Hamou.

Do you have any proof that Oma has used these names? It would be logical for her to have used Oma Demian, since she had the misfortune to have been married to Marcus Demian, and it is normal in our society for a woman to take her husband’s surname. As for why she goes by Oma Hamou, again that was her second husband’s surname, and she did not feel a need to go back to her maiden name after the divorce. This is not at all unusual in our society.

This is the story of a grifter, but a grifter with a twist. While most grifters run their confidence games simply as a means to live, Oma Hamou had dreams. She was going to be a movie star, a film producer, an international business executive, and a woman to whom powerful men would turn to pour out their hearts and open their wallets. She was going to Hollywood.

Oma has never been a grifter, and this claim is nothing but libel and defamation of character. In fact, she is so far from being a grifter that when she divorced, she did not ask for any money from her husband even though the community property was valued in excess of $1,000,000. She did not want the money. If she had been a grifter, she would have sued for at least half, if not all of it, because of the abuse she suffered at the hands of Marcus Demian; abuse that is documented in hospital and police records, along with court documents.

Nor did Oma intend to be a movie star. She did work as a model, and while she did some acting work, it was primarily background work, she never wanted to be a star. It was the work as a model which actually was where she made most of her money, doing artistic photos. It is also well known that rich men are drawn to models, wanting their arm candy. She could have married some of these men, but didn’t take all the offers that she had. If she had been a grifter and just looking for money, she would have married these men, then found a way to get all their money before leaving them. None of that happened.

This is not the first time this tale has been told about Hollywood. And it is not the first time the tale has been infused with deep psychosis. But it is perhaps the first time the psychosis has been manifested as a fantasy about a defunct royal dynasty, where the antagonist dresses herself in imperial regalia, where she takes the name of a dead empress, where she posts on the internet her fantasies of being a reincarnated Romanov – and where she actually dwells so deep inside the fantasy that she will risk prison in increasingly desperate attempts to maintain her own distorted reality, heedless of the cost to a long roster of victims.

I never before knew that a wedding dress could be considered to be “imperial regalia.” The picture of Oma in her wedding dress was indeed used to promote the picture, but it was never imperial regalia, and a picture was needed to promote the film project in its pre-production stages. This is again, very normal behavior in Hollywood. It is not Oma that is so obsessed with with the Romanov family, it is Bob Atchison, as has been shown in court documents.

The “name of a dead Empress” was given to her as a baptismal name. It is not truly unusual or any sign of instability for a person to choose to go by their baptismal name, especially for the truly devout. Oma has never posted any fantasies about being reincarnated at all. A famous Russian astrologer cast her chart and claims that it shows that she was a reincarnation of a member of the Romanov family. Oma does not believe in reincarnation however, so she does not make that claim herself. It was not even Oma who posted that astrological reading on the internet, it was her friends who had originally ordered and paid for the chart as a gift to her, not Oma.

Oma Hamou was born as Oma Louise McConnell on August 1, 1963 in Charleston, West Virginia. Little is known of her early years, other than hints of some sort of domestic abuse she claimed as a young girl. She first showed up in the public record as Oma McConnell when she was apprehended in 1983 in Los Angeles while posing as a catering employee to gain entry to a reception Nancy Reagan was giving for Queen Elizabeth. This was the first sign of Oma Hamou’s pathological obsession with royalty, the obsession around which the tale of this grift will unfold.

Oma has never been diagnosed as having any pathological obsessions. Therefore, this statement is very libelous and defamatory. Nor was she ever apprehended (aka arrested) as this claims for posing as a catering employee. This, along with the continued claim of “grift,” is just more libel and defamation.

The next few years are somewhat hazy, as she lived and worked under various names. That period did produce a series of soft-core pornography shots of her in various states of undress and provocative poses which even today, some twenty-plus years later, she continues to post on the internet. At only 5’0” and with a rather extreme jaw line, she remained on the periphery of the “art” industry, using her work there primarily as the basis for future claims that she was a professional model and film actress. Over the years, even though she trumpets her modeling and film work in a series of self-promoting internet sites, she has steadfastly refused to furnish actual film or modeling credits.

Again, there is so much untruth in this paragraph that it proves how this person is not at all credible. Oma is definitely significantly taller than 5’0”. In fact, models normally are taller than that, rarely being shorter than 5’8”. There also were absolutely no “soft-core” pornography shots that I have ever seen of her. There have been art shots in various draped or partially dressed states, but those do not show the required parts of the anatomy to be considered porn by anyone but a puritan. As far as the comment about the “rather extreme jaw line,” that one really is a matter of opinion. While her jaw line is strong, there is nothing extreme about it. However, no matter what her detractors/obsessed stalkers claim, modeling for art photography is truly modeling. It does not require one to be on a catwalk or on the cover of Cosmopolitan magazine to be a model.

The early 1990’s were somewhat rough for Oma. The bloom was off the lily for work in the “art” industry, and she had to find another means of support. She became the tenth wife of a much older man, and the marriage ended in fireworks as Oma accumulated a string of felony convictions for passing bad checks that her husband would not honor, and she then accused her husband of child molestation. Fleeing the terms of her probation, she several times found herself in jail awaiting extradition and probation violation hearings.

Wow, some of this is actually true. Oma did become the tenth wife of an older man, a marriage that ended badly after Marcus abused Oma. Yes, she did get 3 convictions for writing bad checks when fleeing this abusive husband. (3 in a such a short period of time under such extreme duress can hardly be considered a “string.”) This abusive husband did indeed tell the courts that he would honor the checks, making them good, then failed to do so. Once Oma was aware that Marcus had lied about repaying the checks (he even had gone so far as to show her written out checks that were supposed to replace the NSF checks,) then she herself did so.

However, she did not marry for money, she was able to support herself without needing the help of a husband. She actually believed him to be the person he claimed he was, not seeing the creature that he was in reality. Oma never fled the terms of her probation. She honored them fully. It was a paperwork error that has been well documented that had her temporarily considered to be in violation of her probation. However, the error was found and corrected, with her being acknowledged by the all the courts to not be in violation. Court documentation proves this.

By the late 1990’s, Oma had dusted herself off and moved into the home of another very elderly and rather senile man. This time she fared somewhat better, finding that the man had significant assets she could access by forging his name on checks and opening credit accounts in his name. With access to these funds, she could at last begin the grift to fund her fantasy in earnest. So she began to assemble the pieces of the marketing façade she would use to bill herself as a well-connected, heavily-funded film impresario about to produce a major film on the final years of Russia’s Romanov dynasty. She, of course, would star in the film as Her Imperial Majesty, the Empress Alexandra.

The elderly man in question here was not senile at the time when Oma moved into his home. Oma never forged his name on any checks, nor did she open any credit accounts in his name. There has never been one shred of evidence to support these libelous claims against Oma. In fact, he was able to get an American Express card through Oma’s company, Enigma Films. Furthermore, the documentation to prove that these claims again Oma are libelous and defamatory have been posted on the internet, in this; a forum used to defend her against such accusations by her obsessive stalkers.

The first step was to have a script at hand for the movie project. She embezzled funds from her elderly housemate’s business accounts to pay a writer to produce a script for the movie, entitled A Matter of Honour. (When the old gentleman’s family found out about the theft, they contacted the Elder Abuse Unit of the Los Angeles Police Department, which determined a scam was underway but could not be prosecuted because the primary witness was too senile to be an effective witness.)

If Oma had truly embezzeled funds, then there would have been a trial, at least an arrest, neither of which ever occurred. The only evidence of anything dealing with money between Oma and this gentleman is a loan document, including notes on it by him when she made payments on that loan. As for any business money, it was controlled by this gentleman’s sons. He himself had absolutely no access to that money, and did not even want it. He had given the company to his sons because he chose to be retired and enjoy his golden years the way that he wanted to. Therefore, it would have been impossible for Oma to do as this defamatory and libelous claim states, and embezzle any funds from these accounts. While this gentleman’s daughter in law did convince her husband to file with the Elder Abuse Unit, the case report actually states “case closed due to lack of evidence.” There was just no evidence at all to support such claims, because there had been no crime committed. It was just greed because the gentleman was spending his money as he so chose, rather than hoarding it all for his children to invest.

Additionally, Oma never paid anyone to write a film script, nor did she even contract to pay anyone for a script for the film “A Matter of Honor.” The gentleman did pay for one script to be written by his daughter-in-law’s sister, but it had absolutely nothing to do with Imperial Russia. In fact, it was supposed to be about the Middle East and Saddam Hussein. However, this relative also never delivered even a single page of the script, but merely spent the money he paid her for her own ends.

To establish her credentials as a businesswoman, Ms. Hamou contracted with Global Insight to produce an economic impact report. Using data and assumptions fed to them by Ms. Hamou, this report calculated an economic value to the Russian economy of tens of millions of dollars deriving from the major motion picture Ms. Hamou was going to film on the outskirts of St. Petersburg. (Global Insight eventually sued Ms. Hamou for non-payment of the $60,000 she owed them for this report, and they demanded that she cease to use it in promoting her project. She continued to publish the report on the internet. The judgment in favor of Global Insight has never been paid.)

Oma did not contract for the economic impact to establish credentials as a businesswoman. Her reputation as a business woman was already in existence (only to be later destroyed by the lies, libel, and defamation of Bob Atchison, Rob Moshein, and Pallasart.) Oma had this report produced because she was meeting with officials in Washington D.C., the World Bank, and with other leaders regarding her companies projects in the country of Russia. Such documentation is a normal part of doing international business, especially when one is hoping to get assistance by other organizations (as is normal when making a movie, especially an international one.)

Had it not been for the continued interference by Pallasart and Bob Atchison - who on a daily basis created several libelous sites, contacted various organizations and individuals who she was doing business with and slandered her – Oma would have been able to raise the additional funds necessary to pay the bills that occur when one is making a movie. She should indeed have been able to complete this film project, most likely creating enough income to pay back all such loans, etc. Bob Atchison (and Pallasart) made many false, libelous, and defamatory, but unsubstantiated accusations against Oma including such things Oma was a fugitive on the run, had no real film project, was a con artist etc. Bob Atchison went so far as to contact the state department daily with his accusations, faxed people copies of the debts that he alleged were hers, even contacted leaders in Russia (such as the governor of Pskov) with his lies about her in an attempt to discredit her.

She then provided Dunn & Bradstreet with a series of fabricated facts about a film company with one hundred employees, a large production facility, and serious financial backing. Dunn & Bradstreet dutifully issued a listing reflecting these claims. (Dunn & Bradstreet eventually discovered that the data had been fabricated and rescinded its rating of Ms. Hamou’s faked enterprise. In fact, Oma Hamou did hire several people for a short period of time. She used their social security numbers to obtain personal American Express credit cards in their names – but she had the billing sent to her – and she promptly ran up around $400,000 in charges. American Express sued her, the elderly gentleman, and two of her “employees”. The two “employees” were later dropped from the judgment, as they were able to prove they were unaware of the charges placed in their names. The elderly gentleman was held liable, as Ms. Hamou was living with him and used his address to obtain the cards. The American Express judgment has never been paid.)

This is another false and libelous statement. Oma did not provide Dunn & Bradstreet any information of any kind, nor did anyone else truly associated with her project, until after Oma and her attorneys found out that someone else had falsely opened an account in her name in 2003. They found out because Bob and Pallasart had posted this report on their libelous website about Oma. Dunn & Bradstreet have even requested Bob Atchison & Pallasart to cease and desist in posting this libelous statement, yet they continue to repost this in direct violation of that request.

This is another false and libelous statement. Oma did not use anyone’s social security cards. Each person who got an American Express card through her company had to sign an agreement with both American Express and Enigma films before they were able to receive and use their cards. The elderly gentleman (Donald Morton) insisted in being in court and actually volunteered to pay the charges against his card because he was an honorable man. The other two employees were actually dropped from the suit because Oma and Enigma requested that they be dropped. Therefore, the statement was once again false, libelous and defamatory. In fact, another person not mentioned by the liar who wrote this supposed “Anatomy of a Con” also had an American Express card through Enigma, and he was not mentioned at all in the suit either. This gentleman was one Father Markell, who has also at times been libeled and defamed by Bob Atchison and Pallasart.

Ms. Hamou then had herself photographed in full costume as the Empress Alexandra and purchased a series of full-page ads in the entertainment industry newspaper Variety. (The publisher of Variety eventually sued Ms. Hamou for failing to pay for these ads. That judgment has never been paid.)

Ms. Hamou had herself photographed in a wedding dress – something that is so normal that I cannot imagine how anyone could be insane enough to believe that there was something wrong with having such a picture taken. It is true that said picture was used to promote her film project in Variety magazine and other publications, and that thanks to the interference of Bob Atchison and Pallasart with her business, that she has been unable to pay this debt in full, though partial payment has been made, along with a stated intention to finish repaying the debt. Advertising agencies do understand the circumstances, and are willing to work with her so that they can eventually be paid, even if Enigma Films is unable to do so at this time.

She also created a sham charity, called the Sarskaia Foundation, of which she appointed herself Chairwoman and which put itself forward on the internet as an organization that channeled large funds to Russia for the restoration of its imperial architectural heritage. (The phone number of the charity rang to a community bank in Los Angeles which had never heard of the Sarskaia Foundation or of its Chairwoman Oma Hamou.)

First, this is not a “sham charity” because it never finished the process required to achieve non-profit states due to the interference of Pallasart and Bob Atchison (who has admitted in court documents that he is obsessed with Russia, the Romanov family, and the Alexander Palace. One must note that obsession is never a good thing being a form of mental instability.) Furthermore Sarskaia Foundation is a currently defunct California Corporation – though it was functional at the time of the interference. It is only defunct until such time as Oma pays its fees and taxes, to reinstate it, which she intends to do sometime in the near future. This organization has never “put itself forward on the internet as an organization that channeled large funds to Russia…” The telephone number for this account never rang to a community bank. It was a number that was specifically assigned to Sarskaia at that time by virtue of its contract. It might now ring through to a bank, or other business since Sarskaia has ended the contractual use of that number, and therefore it could be released to someone else.

She wrote a self-promoting article about herself, discussing her many business ventures, her world travels, her grand movie project, and her associations with powerful politicians and churchmen in Russia and the United States. (She claimed the article was authored by a journalist named Nitzana Kedem. While she perhaps thought it clever to use a Jewish-sounding name when trying to promote herself to the film industry, the name Nitzana Kedem was actually an amalgam of an Israeli grocery store chain and a campaign of the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.)

This statement written above is false, libelous, and defamatory. It is merely a product of faulty research at best, or an intentional desire to harm Oma at worst. Rob and Bob have been told by the courts that it is up to them to prove that the person who is stated to have authored the article did not do it, and they have failed to do so because their claims on this matter are lies. Nitzana did indeed write the article. It is not Oma’s fault, or Nitzana’s that Rob and Bob have been unable to find her. The claim is as false (and proof of faulty research) as Rob’s claim that Oma lives in Montclair – something else he has posted that is completely false.

The final stage was to produce a trailer for the movie. Knowing that nothing sells film like film, Ms. Hamou contracted for sound stages, for costuming and hairdressing, and for other associated services. (Checks were written on a closed bank account, lawsuits proceeded, and the Irvine, California Police were eventually called in. Ms. Hamou lost the lawsuits, never paid the judgments, and only avoided prosecution for the bad checks by making good on the debt to Wild West Productions, which was to produce the trailer.)

This is not in any way the final stage of Ms. Hamou’s film project. Ms. Hamou did indeed make good on the checks and the judgement. There was no crime committed, in fact the police department of Irvine believed Oma over the words of Bob Atchison and Pallasart's people. The report states this, as well as the fact that the case is closed. In fact, Oma did not even know about the case being opened until after Rob and Bob hijacked a history forum to post the lie that there was a warrant out for her on the checks. She checked with the Irvine police department, who denied that there was a warrant, but explained that there was a case because of bounced checks, and Oma just brought down cashiers checks to replace the bounced checks, making good on them.

However, it is proof of Bob and Rob’s obsession with Oma that they constantly check for any hint of any news about her, and then post it in a distorted fashion on the web in their attempts to destroy this woman who has never in any way harmed them, or anyone else. They have even gone so far as to call police departments and lie about her – lies that include accusations that Oma supposedly had a priest, Father Markell, cosign a loan with her and that priest is now homeless. Bob indeed libeled a priest in this way, just to try and harm Oma.

The ducks were now all in a row to move on to the next stage of the scam. Ms. Hamou contacted a man named Robert Atchison and put him under contract for $7,000 a month to be her chief consultant on the film project. Mr. Atchison was a recognized specialist on Russia’s last tsar, Nicholas II, and he owned the largest and most heavily-visited history site on the internet: “The Alexander Palace”, named for the principal residence of the last tsar.

This is impossible, because Bob Atchison was met in 2000, and all the rest of the above mentioned stuff happened after that – in the years 2002 to 2006. Bob Atchison never introduced Oma to Father Markell, or any other person in the Russian Orthodox Church in Russia. It was Dr. Sautov who introduced Oma to many important, high ranking members of the Church. Nor did Bob introduce Oma to Dr. Sautov, since he could not stand Bob and wanted nothing to do with him at all. The contract was only to come into use if the film got fully funded, and actually got filmed. However, since Bob Atchison and Pallasart decided instead to sabotage the project by his interference with her business and her associates, then there was no need for him to be a consultant, and the contract never came into play.

Mr. Atchison had broad and deep connections in Russia with authorities charged with the preservation and development of the former imperial complex in Pushkin, Russia, as well as with senior people in the Russian Orthodox Church. Ms. Hamou asked to be introduced to these people, which Mr. Atchison did.

This is another false statement. All of the people that Bob claimed that he was connected with actually uhated/u Bob Atchison. In fact, they would not do business with Oma until she resigned as vice-president of his web design company's web club called the Alexander Palace Assocaition. They would not do any business with anyone who was closely assocaited with Bob Atchison who the consider to be a coward, thief, liar, troublemaker, made false promises (delivering on none of them) and that he promoted himself as being a big-shot about the restoration of the Alexander Palace when according to these Russian officials Bob did absolutely nothing on the palace. He just used his website to promote himself and to collect money that never went to the palace where it was supposed to go. In court records Bob Atchison was unable to produce even a single shred of evidence that he actually sent any of the money collected to its intended usage in Russia. This is documentation that he should have had readily available. (Bob Atchison's own letter to John Stubbs of the World Monuments Fund proves this which he provided to the courts.)

To me, this looks like Bob Atchison scammed people out of their money for a project that he never worked on, never forwarded the money. His website seems to me only to be for his own personal gain. Wouldn’t this make him a grifter, a liar, a con artist – someone committing fraud for monetary gain? No wonder then he tried using such claims against Oma, it is something that he seems to be personally familiar with.

Ms. Hamou promptly set her plan in motion. She hired a Russian public relations firm, provided them with the faked Global Insight economic impact report, the fraudulently-obtained Dunn & Bradstreet rating, the unpaid ad coverage from Variety, the movie script paid for with stolen funds, and other faked credentials. Backed by these proofs of her considerable financial means and her intent to do great things for the advancement of Russian imperial history, the public relations firm succeeded in getting Ms. Hamou considerable print and television coverage in St. Petersburg and elsewhere in Russia.

First, the Global Insight economic impact report was not faked, it was a real report. It was a real report written for a real project, one that Bob and Rob claimed never existed even though there is a trail of documentation to prove that it did, and in fact that it continues to exist even if its completion has been delayed by the interference of these who seem to be obsessive, stalking, con artists. Neither Oma nor Enigma ever fraudulently obtained a Dunn & Bradstreet rating, nor did she steal any funds to pay for a script, in fact she wrote the script herself, with one other person. The script was a labor of love by these two people, love for the subject matter not for each other. Since neither Oma nor Enigma films never opened an Dunn & Bradstreet account until after reading the report about its existence for the first time on Pallasarts website, it is Oma’s belief that the Dunn & Bradstreet account was opened either by Bob Atchison somebody connected with him. This belief is based both on where the report of the account first appeared (Bob Atchison’s company website) and on Bob Atchison’s continued use of false pretenses in his attempts to gather information about Oma Hamou.

As for the claims about the “unpaid ads” in Variety, the purpose of the ads was to get investors to help complete the film project, “A Matter Of Honor.” This is normal behavior in Hollywood, people promote their films to get investors. If Bob Atchison and Pallasart had not interfered with the film project, and it had been allowed to proceed normally, then the money would have come in and the bills would have been paid. This is again standard in Hollywood.
The statement that she had “fake credentials” is another false, libelous, and defamatory statement. Nobody has ever come up with any evidence to show that Oma had any fake credentials. In fact, I have not found anything other than this vague reference to “fake credentials” without any actual statement of what these credentials are. How can they be fake if nobody says what these credentials are to begin with?

The reason why Oma was put on television was because Enigma Films/Oma Hamou was invited to participate in the second U.S./Russia energy summit held in St. Petersburg, Russia. People were excited about the project, and Sarskaia Foundation after this invitation, and that is why she got the economic impact report done. It was much more than just her film project at that point, it was a marriage between history and Hollywood. The Russian people were invigorated by the project, and that is when Bob Atchison and Pallasart started the websites libeling Oma, and Bob started the letter campaign against her, telephone calls, etc. trying to destroy her credibility and her project. The year was 2003. This was the year that Bob Atchison decided to lodge a suit against Oma, three years after doing a minor amount of work for Enigma, but he chose to sue her personally, not the company with which he had a contract. Just more facts that the “anonymous author” of this fictional story got wrong.

To reinforce the façade that she was a major new player on the scene of Romanov history, Ms. Hamou claimed to have a sixty-million-dollar “trust fund” at hand to finance her film project and to fund the restoration of the Feodorovsky Cathedral and the Alexander Palace, which would be used as sets for her motion picture epic. The Russians, both desperate for funds to halt the decay of their beloved monuments and somewhat naïve about western business practices, took her at her word. Both the Feodorovsky Cathedral and the Alexander Palace hired work crews and began repairs on the promise from Ms. Hamou that funds would be placed at their disposal immediately.

This is another completely false, libelous, and defamatory statement created by a man who is obsessed with Oma, Russia, and the Alexander Palace. Oma never claimed that she had a sixty million dollar trust fund to finance all the work. She was looking for investors to help her with both the film project and the restoration, not intending to finance it all herself. The Russians are not, and were not desperate for funds. The Russians are not desperate people, and the Russian government is not desperate. Russians did not NEED outside interference to restore their national monuments, they were already working on the restoration, and they had World Bank behind them as well as their own money. The Russian Oligarchs put their own money into this restoration. Putin put in his own money as well. Oma wants to make sure that she believes that the Russian people, Putin, and Dr. Sautov are the real heroes of the restoration of the churches and monuments in Russia.

Oma udid indeed /ucommission work for both the Alexander Palace and the Feodorovsky Cathedral. She also paid for the work that she commissioned. She still has the receipts to prove that she commissioned and paid for it. Therefore, once again, this author’s statement is false, libelous, and defamatory.

And here the façade hiding Ms. Hamou’s private pathological fantasy of a personal connection to royalty and her desperate desire to be a movie star and film producer began to fall apart. There were, of course, no funds behind any of the promises. And bills – real, live bills – were coming due.

Oma has never claimed that she has a personal connection to royalty. In fact, it is Bob Atchison who claims that the Empress Alexandra talked to him in dreams, telling him to destroy Oma. It seems to me from that statement that it is Bob Atchison who has the private pathological fantasies – both of the connection to royalty and of the destruction of a woman who never did him any harm. The reason that money ran out and things began to “fall apart” is because of the sabotage campaign that Bob Atchison and his web design company, Pallasart waged against her – most likely because she dared to succeed where he could not and where he was unwanted. In fact, Bob Atchison, Pallasart, and Bob’s partner Rob Moshein continue to this day to wage this war against Oma, libeling, defaming, harassing, and stalking her, interfering with her business, slandering. All the libelous sites that show up when one googles Oma’s name are ones that were started by these saboteurs and their cronies, making each new and continuing project which Oma is involved with a much greater struggle than it should be, all because their defamation and libel is on the web in an attempt to keep anyone from being willing associate with her.

Ms. Hamou’s first impulse was to attempt to buy time. She was beset by a string of sudden illnesses, car accidents, misdirected mail, just-missed calls, bank mistakes, and personal emergencies of friends and family.

This is a completely false, libelous, and defamatory statement. There was never an attempt to “buy time.” Time is of the essence in the film industry, once a project is started, it is important to keep the momentum going. The momentum was lost because Oma got bogged down in false accusation by these saboteurs.

As people who had incurred their own liabilities in reliance on her promises began to suspect they had been scammed, they turned to Mr. Atchison, their friend and the man who had brought Oma Hamou into their lives.

This is a false, libelous, and defamatory statement. People did not turn to Bob. He started the sites libeling and defaming her, leading new people to then write him letters to thank him for “warning” them about her. He also went to Russia, taking a document that he attempted to use to try and convince the Russian people that Oma was a con artist and that there was no film project. He claimed that it said she was a fugitive at that time, which was a false statement and a misinterpretation of what the document actually said. He also told them that Oma supposedly accused Father Markell of molesting her, an accusation that she did not make, and would never make. It was a lie he told knowing that it would make people angry that someone would falsely accuse a priest.

Mr. Atchison, in an attempt to protect his reputation and to make amends to victims where he could, began to warn his associates of Ms. Hamou’s fraudulent activities. Ms. Hamou responded with fusillades of attacks on Mr. Atchison, calling his customers, launching internet attacks on him, and otherwise claiming he was defaming her. In an attempt to procure payment for his own services, he sued Ms. Hamou and won the case by jury verdict.

As stated above, this entire statement is false, libelous, and defamatory. In fact, it was Bob Atchison and his company Pallasarts who launched the internet attacks on Oma and her companies, called her customers and her business associates, made false statements to the police in efforts to have her arrested for supposed crimes that she never committed. He did sue Ms. Hamou, but he won the judgement because he and his lawyer committed fraud and perjury in court, submitting false documents and lying about the facts of the case and Ms. Hamou. There has been a Bill of Review filed on this case, and the court transcripts show that Bob lied frequently, and continuously throughout the entire proceeding. :wink:

Ms. Hamou has been sued approximately a dozen times and has lost every suit. In most cases, she never bothered to show for trial, knowing she had neither means nor intent to pay any judgment. Where she found trial unavoidable, she worked through lawyers, absenting herself from the courtroom as often as possible with claims of recurrent illness or accident. (Two of her lawyers have sued their own client for non-payment for their services.)

It is not at all surprising that Oma Hamou did not turn up to court, when she was not properly served and had no knowledge of the suit, much less the court date. It was not her intentionally avoiding courts or not intending to pay, it was a lack of knowledge. The time that this is alluding to when her lawyers showed up instead of her is because she was sick with pneumonia, the proof of which has been posted on this forum. It was accepted by the courts as a legitimate reason for her failure to appear. It was merely Bob and Rob who did not accept it, but they are not people of any authority.

In almost every case, Ms. Hamou has ignored the judgment against her and moved on with her life and scams.

The only people that Oma has avoided have been her obsessive stalkers, Bob Atchison and Rob Moshein. It is their interference with her business that has kept her from being able to complete her projects giving her the income to pay any LEGITIMATE judgments or debts.

But the lawsuit by Mr. Atchison was another matter. This was a man who occupied the position she desperately craved – to be recognized as an authority on late Romanov history and as the chief American advocate of the restoration of the dynasty’s last residence. She could tolerate lawsuits by others with equanimity. But to have Mr. Atchison – the man who had turned on her when her scam in Pushkin imperiled his own reputation – sue her was just not to be borne. So she traveled to Texas, where she personally but unsuccessfully defended the lawsuit.

This is another occurance of transference. It is Bob Atchison who is so desperate to be recognized as an authority on Romanov history, etc. He has stated so in court, along with many other places. Yet, for all of his desperation he has never produced any evidence that he has succeeded in helping financially with any restoration, or anything else of importance. His big claim to fame on that is being one of the people pleading with the World Monuments Fund to put the Alexander Palace on the list on 100 most endangered historical monuments back in the 1990s. However, he was but one of many people making this request. Unbeknownst to many, Dr. Sautov and his Government had already been in contact with the World bank and the World Monuments Fund about this very project.

The reason that she could not tolerate his suit with equanimity was because he was libeling, defaming, and slandering her, imperiling her reputation and her projects, and just lying about her, her projects, and the very reason for his suit, along with defaming a priest, one with whom Oma had become friends. As previously stated, he sued her personally instead of the company with whom he had contracted, claiming that she personally owed him. This happened after he found out that she was on television in Russia, being recognized by both the U.S. State department and Russia for the work she had hoped to do for the Alexander Palace. She had achieved the fame that she did not seek but that Bob Atchison so desperately craved.

Coming off that loss, she embarked on an unrelenting, psychologically unhinged, and defamatory campaign to do anything she could to strike at someone she perceives as the most mortal of enemies: the man who unmasked her psychotic fantasy as the scam it was from the very beginning.

Another case of transference. For those who do not understand what I mean by that, Bob Atchison and his cronies have accused Oma of doing what they (especially Bob Atchison and Rob Moshein) have been doing to her. Bob and Pallasarts attacks against Oma began in 2000, and she did not start her forum which is used to defend her from all these false, libelous, defamatory and harmful statements until 2004. Therefore, the timeline alone shows that she was not the one doing the attacking. It is her stalkers who relentlessly search for every bit of information they can about her, and then try to twist it to their own ends, using it to hurt her or pretending it does not exist if it proves her point. They are the ones who have been shown to be obsessive, psychotic, and mentally unbalanced. There has never been any evidence shown that any of that can be stated about Oma.

Furthermore, they have gone so far as to attempt to harm anyone who willingly associates with Oma and defends her. For example, they put up a libelous, defamatory site about Mike Newson in an attempt to destroy him and his friendship with Oma. Their lies ruined his reputation, and cost him a job, merely because he was her friend and believed in her. Fortunately, those who matter most to him knew that it was all lies, so while it did cost him an education job, it did not cost him anything worse and he remains her friend to this day.

Even today, as she awaits trial on yet another felony charge that could well send her to prison, she spends her time launching website after website attacking Mr. Atchison and his associates. Her life continues to unravel. She has been living in hiding under an assumed name with another convicted forger. She was arrested recently for driving without license, registration, or insurance. Yet she spends hour after hour, day in and day out, posting on the internet about Mr. Atchison and his associates. She will not stop. She cannot stop.

This is the anatomy of a con. This is the Oma Hamou story.
POSTED BY WATCHTOWER AT 11:34 AM

Once again this is nothing but a false, libelous, defamatory statement. Oma does not spend any time on the internet attacking Mr Atchison and his associates. She does not even post anything to defend herself, relying instead on those of us who know the truth and are her friends to handle posting all the refutations of the lies, libel, and defamatory attacks launched against her. She has not been arrested for driving without license, registration or insurance as “Watchtower” claims. Yes, she does indeed hide her residence, because she does not want her obsessive stalkers to find out where she lives. This is for nothing more than self-protection, something anyone would do when endangered the way that she is by these mentally unbalanced people saboteurs and their associates. However, she does not use an assumed name, she uses her own name. She just makes certain that Rob and Bob cannot find out where she lives. Also, the implication is made that Omais a convicted forger, but this is another false, libelous, and defamatory statement. Oma has never been convicted of forgery. One merely has to check her records to verify that information, if one is intelligent enough to actually read them.

As for Oma unwisely inviting Tina VanVeen to briefly stay with her, all it means is that Oma believes that people deserve a second chance. She knows that one can do things in desperation, or make a youthful mistake, and that does not mean that the person is intending to continue a life of crime. Therefore, the only thing here that Oma is truly guilty of is being compassionate and giving someone a chance, a person who unfortunately chose not to make the most of that chance but instead decided to return to a life of crime.