Singer absolutely terrified of Diddy, lawyer says
3 min read
Sean 'Diddy' Combs and Dawn Richard of Diddy-Dirty Money perform in 2010. Gareth Cattermole/Getty Images/File
Dawn Richard, a former member of the groups formed by Sean “Diddy” Combs, has made serious allegations against the rapper, claiming she was “absolutely terrified” of him, according to her lawyer. In a lawsuit filed in September, Richard accused Combs of threatening her life and subjecting her to years of “inhumane working conditions” that included sexual assault, groping, and false imprisonment.
Richard, who was a part of Danity Kane and Diddy – Dirty Money, is one of over two dozen individuals who have filed legal complaints against Combs. In addition to these civil suits, Combs is facing criminal charges related to racketeering and sex trafficking.
Combs, however, denies all allegations, with his legal team describing Richard’s claims as “manufactured” and “false.” Lisa Bloom, Richard’s attorney, spoke out, saying that her client accused Combs of groping her, sexually assaulting her, and withholding promised payment. Bloom also stated that Richard was subjected to harsh working conditions, where she was not allowed to eat or sleep and was “treated terribly” by Combs.
Additionally, Bloom revealed that Richard witnessed “severe acts of violence” committed by Combs against his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura, as well as other women. Richard claims she attempted to intervene during these incidents and encourage Ventura to leave Combs, but she was met with threats of physical violence. According to Bloom, Richard said Combs had a violent temper, and that she lived in constant fear of him.
The legal case brings further attention to Combs’ past, including a lawsuit filed by Cassie Ventura a year ago, in which she accused Combs of rape and sex trafficking, although she later settled the case. A video also emerged from 2016, showing Combs attacking Ventura in a hotel corridor.
Richard’s lawsuit describes her witnessing Combs “brutally beat” Ventura multiple times, and Richard allegedly attempted to help Ventura leave him. Each time Richard tried to intervene, Combs became enraged and allegedly threatened her life, warning that “there will be consequences” if she told anyone and that “people go missing.”
In response to the lawsuit, Combs’ attorney, Erica Wolff, expressed that the rapper was “shocked and disappointed” by the claims. Wolff asserted that Richard’s accusations were false and “manufactured,” suggesting that she made up the allegations in an effort to secure a payout. Combs, Wolff stated, is confident that he will prove the truth in court.
Bloom also revealed in an interview that another of her clients is preparing to come forward with allegations related to parties hosted by Combs, which were reportedly dubbed “freak-offs.” According to Bloom, multiple individuals have already alleged that they were drugged and coerced into sexual activities in exchange for business opportunities with Combs.
As Combs faces these allegations, he is also dealing with a criminal case. He is due back in court on Friday to request bail after previous bail requests were denied due to concerns that he might tamper with witnesses. Prosecutors have claimed that Combs violated prison rules by contacting potential witnesses using other inmates’ phone accounts.
One key individual in the investigation is Kalenna Harper, the third member of Diddy – Dirty Money. Prosecutors allege that Combs had 128 phone calls with Harper shortly after Richard filed her lawsuit. Harper, however, publicly stated that Richard’s allegations “are not representative of my experiences,” and that some details did not align with her own recollections.
Bloom did not name Harper in her interview but referred to a woman who came forward and publicly called Richard a liar. Bloom implied that Combs may have influenced Harper’s statement, potentially through financial means. If this is the case, Bloom argued, it would constitute witness tampering. The judge in Combs’ case agreed with this argument, denying him bail.
Combs’ legal team, however, defended the statement made by Harper, suggesting that differences in the recollections of two witnesses do not constitute witness tampering. They argued that this was simply a case of “divergent recollections” regarding similar events.
As the legal proceedings unfold, the case continues to draw attention to the accusations surrounding Combs, his business practices, and his treatment of those who have worked with him.
About The Author
