Pitbull’s hit ‘I feel good’ inspired by Ruby Rose impersonating a judge, court hears

Bizarre claims that the lyrics in a hit song by American rapper Pitbull, inspired by Australian actress Ruby Rose who ‘impersonates a judge during a trial’, have been broadcast in one of the highest courts in the country.

Daily Mail Australia can reveal that a Victoria Supreme Court judge was forced to rule on the allegations after a Melbourne man demanded Pitbull, aka Armando Christian Pérez, hand over the workings of how he performed the song ‘I Feel Good’ ‘ came.

Mark Lawlor represented himself in court last month and had sought “discovery” of documents he hoped would prove his outlandish claim.

“I am trying to confirm the song ‘I feel good’ by the artist Armando Christian Perez, the stage name ‘Pitbull’ refers to Ruby Rose posing as a judge in the Broadmeadows Magistrates’ Court in 2017. That court is located in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia,” Lawlor’s preliminary motion stated to the court.

Lawlor claimed that the lyrics to the song, which read, “Put on a coat because these diamonds give you chills,” were clear references to Rose’s 2017 court appearance.

“Diamonds in the song refer to Ruby Rose,” he stated.

‘Coat in the song refers to Ruby Rose wearing a black cloak/jacket/cloak, some sort of black covering to disguise her Hollywood characteristics, IE: neck tattoos, personal appearance.

“These references are references to Ruby Rose posing as a judge in a real-life lawsuit I was involved in, in 2017.”

Daily Mail Australia is in no way suggesting that Rose was involved in any such case within the court, only that the allegations were contained in Lawlor’s legal challenge.

Lawlor demanded that the court compel the rapper to “disclose his knowledge/documentation about Ruby Rose posing as a judge.”

“If there are any documents that are or have been in his possession, or may still be in his possession, if not, then his knowledge of any documentation that existed or may not exist now is relevant to this preliminary discovery which allowed him to “I feel good,” in which Ruby Rose referred to impersonating a judge,” Lawlor explained.

When hearing the case, Judge Stephen O’Meara was told that Rose had appeared in court on October 11, 2017, where she had allegedly “issued a court order implying a commitment.”

Lawlor claimed that Rose “had her head half shaved” and was “wearing some sort of black robe…tight to her chin to cover her neck tattoos.”

Among other things, the track would reference a drinking fountain that he had requested from Broadmeadow Magistrates’ Court, Lawlor claimed.

The court heard that Lawlor had been involved in several other events and complaints, including one in 2018 when ‘Sandra Bullock the Hollywood actor’ was alleged to have been present at a lawsuit involving him in the Broadmeadows Magistrates’ Court…’because from him)’.

Lawlor claimed that Rose’s “commitment” to him constituted “a clear violation of human rights.”

“And the Broadmeadows court documents were forged and fraudulent,” Lawlor told the court.

The case went to Judge O’Meara after court staff rejected Lawlor’s documents for submission.

“Dear Mr. Lawlor, The Prothonotary has reviewed your affidavit and there is no evidence yet to seek permission from the court to compel Armando Christian Perez to submit knowledge/documentation about Ruby Rose posing as a judge at the Broadmeadows Magistrates Court ‘ the court told him.

“There appears to be no plausible basis for concluding that Mr Perez could have any knowledge of events in the Magistrates Court in 2017 and therefore any application under Rule 32.07 is doomed to fail.”

Lawlor demanded a formal decision regarding his Supreme Court application in hopes that the prothonotary would accept his documents.

“Mr. Lawlor requested a hearing. In light of the exceptional circumstances, his request was granted,” Judge O’Meara said.

When the “damned” case went to court, Lawlor tried to serve further subpoenas against Rose, which were again dismissed by the court.

Lawlor claimed there was no trace of Rose’s appearance in court in court files due to a “sickening” cover-up involving “other organizations” and an “illegal” donation of money to the government and “prime ministers, deputies and a billionaire.” ‘.

In making his decision on Tuesday, Judge O’Meara dismissed the bizarre case.

“None of the texts in question refers directly to Ruby Rose, Broadmeadows Magistrates’ Court … or the absence of a drinking fountain,” he said.

“Indeed, I am utterly unable to establish the connection apparently made by Mr Lawlor between the texts in question and the alleged events.

“More generally, I don’t see how elusive references in a rap song or songs said to have been released years after those alleged events could ever show that such events more likely than not happened.”

In a further blow to Lawlor’s allegations, Judge O’Meara labeled his case “hopeless” and it would be an “abuse of process” to talk about it any longer.

“There are some rare and exceptional circumstances where abuse of process will be apparent and established, so that the court must refuse to receive the documents involved in order to protect its own processes and the integrity of the administration of justice,” he said. stated.

“For the reasons I have tried to explain, I regard the present case as one of those rare and exceptional cases.”