Dawn Richard, a former member of two groups formed by Sean "Diddy" Combs, was "absolutely terrified" of the rapper, her lawyer has said.

The singer sued Mr Combs in September, accusing him of threatening her life and "subjecting her to years of inhumane working conditions which included groping, assault, and false imprisonment".

Ms Richard, a former member of Danity Kane and Diddy - Dirty Money, is among more than two dozen people who have filed lawsuits against him. He is also facing criminal charges of racketeering and sex trafficking.

He denies the charges, and his lawyer has called Ms Richard's claims "manufactured" and "false".

Speaking to the BBC's Newsnight on Thursday, attorney Lisa Bloom said her client alleged that "he groped and grabbed her body parts, sexually assaulted her, that he not only failed to pay her money that was promised to her, but actually prevented her from eating and sleeping during those years - just treated her terribly".

Ms Bloom also claimed the singer witnessed "some severe acts of violence" by Mr Combs against his ex-girlfriend Cassie Ventura and other women.

"And when she spoke out, she says she was threatened with more physical violence. She said Sean Combs had a vicious temper and she was absolutely terrified of him."

Ms Ventura, also a singer, sued Mr Combs a year ago accusing him of rape and sex trafficking, and then settled the case a day later.

A video later emerged of him attacking her in a hotel corridor in 2016.

Ms Richard's lawsuit said she witnessed him "brutally beat" Ms Ventura and tried to intervene many times, and encouraged her to leave him.

"Each time, Mr Combs learned of her efforts to help Ms Ventura and became enraged, threatening Ms Richard’s life," the document said.

He allegedly told her "there will be consequences" if she told anyone, and warned that "people go missing".

Ms Bloom said: "Dawn Richard, my client, says that when she spoke out about it, tried to get Cassie to speak out... When she complained about it, she was also threatened with physical violence. So [it was] just a really violent, tumultuous atmosphere."

Mr Combs' lawyer Erica Wolff said the rapper was "shocked and disappointed" by Ms Richard's lawsuit and that she had "manufactured a series of false claims all in the hopes of trying to get a pay day".

He was "confidently standing on truth and looks forward to proving that in court", she added.

On Thursday, Ms Bloom also told Newsnight she has another client who is preparing to come forward with allegations relating to parties thrown by Mr Combs, which were dubbed "freak-offs".

"But many other people already have come forward with the allegations that people were drugged, that they were forced into sexual activity in order to have business deals with Sean Combs," she said.

Mr Combs is due back in court on Friday to make a new request for bail in his criminal case. Judges have previously denied his bail requests, citing a risk that he might tamper with witnesses.

Earlier this week, prosecutors alleged that he had broken prison rules by contacting potential witnesses by using other inmates' telephone accounts.

According to the New York Times, prosecutors have focused on a witness named Kalenna Harper, who was the third member of Diddy - Dirty Money alongside Mr Combs and Ms Richard.

Prosecutors say Mr Combs had 128 phone contacts with Ms Harper shortly after Ms Richard filed her lawsuit, US media reported.

Ms Harper put out a statement saying Ms Richard's allegations "are not representative of my experiences, and some do not align with my own truth".

On Newsnight, Ms Bloom did not name Ms Harper, but said there was a woman who Ms Richard had worked with who "came out publicly and essentially called my client a liar".

She continued: "The strong implication there is that he talked her into making those statements, perhaps gave her money. We don't know.

"But that would be witness tampering. That's what the government argued. The judge agreed and he was denied bail as a result, which he should have been."

However, Mr Combs' lawyers have argued that Ms Harper's statement was "the furthest thing from witness obstruction I can think of", and was just "two witnesses having divergent recollections of similar events".