MURDER accused Sadia Ahmed wept and told jurors she would be grieving the death of her 14-month-old daughter for the rest of her life.

Ahmed, 28, who was giving evidence at the High Court in Glasgow, turned to judge Lord Matthews at the end of her evidence and said: ”My Lord, I’m a grieving mother. I have been grieving for one year, six months and 16 days, and I will be grieving till my very last.” She then broke down, sobbing.

Sadia Ahmed denies murdering Inaya Ahmed on April 17, 2016, at the family home in Bernisdale Drive, Drumchapel, by suffocating her with a pillow.

She has told the jury that her daughter choked on a piece of toast.

Inaya was rushed to the Royal Hospital for Children and put on a life support machine, which was switched off on April 20, 2016.

Earlier, Ahmed told defence QC Ian Duguid that she was not treated well by her husband Suleman’s parents and other family members who lived with them.

She claimed she was made to sleep on the floor in her mother-in-law’s bedroom after she gave birth to Inaya and added: “I was treated like a slave in that house. That’s why I was made to sleep on the floor in her bedroom after giving birth.”

The court heard that health visitors told the family that Inaya, who was a difficult feeder, should be given solid food rather than mashed food.

Susan McIntyre, 50, a nursery nurse with the NHS, said that she visited the family home on November 17, 2015, after concerns were raised about Inaya being fed with a syringe.

Miss McIntyre said: “Sadia welcomed me at the door with Inaya. The place was pristine. The floors were sparkling.

“I was shown into a room where Inaya’s grandmother was. There were no chairs, so I sat on the floor.”

She said that Sadia “fully engaged with her” but got the impression that the child’s grandmother, Noor Ahmed, felt she was interfering.

Miss McIntyre added: “I think she didn’t know why I was there. I was giving advice on solid food, vegetables, carrots, broccoli and toast first thing in the morning, with butter on it to make it softer.”

Mr Duguid asked the nurse: “Did you understand that Inaya was getting mashed up food?” She replied: “She should start using finger foods at nine months old. If a child isn’t used to solid food they don’t develop a gag reflux. Her muscles in her throat wouldn’t have developed properly and it would be difficult for her to swallow.”

Miss McIntyre told the court she later saw Ahmed and her daughter in the Drumchapel community clinic at the beginning of December 2015.

She was then asked by the QC how Ahmed was with her daughter and she replied: “It was very good and positive. Inaya came over to her and she was kissing and cuddling her and there was a lot of good eye contact.”

Yesterday, the prosecution closed its case, urging jurors to convict Sadia Ahmed, who sobbed and shook her head during the closing.

Prosecutor Paul Kearney told the jury that they had to decide if Inaya’s mother Ahmed killed her, or if the toddler choked to death of a piece of toasted bread.

He added: “The question for you is why or what stopped Inaya’s breathing and stopped her heart and killed her.

“It is clear her mother Sadia is solely responsible for this. The crown contends that she calmly snuffed out the life of her child.

“The Crown contends that she suffocated Inaya. It was a murderous death rather than an accidental one.”

Mr Kearney told the jurors it was a circumstantial case, but said if they examine the facts, “it becomes clear that Inaya did not choke on bread, but was suffocated and killed at the hands of her mother”.

He told the jury that an experienced police officer had searched the house and that no trace of toasted bread – not even a crumb – was found.

Mr Kearney also pointed to the fact that medical staff who tended to Inaya found no sign of any obstruction in her throat.

He said that Ahmed’s allegation that the whole family were lying in an elaborate cover-up to falsely frame her for murder was not true. Mr Kearney asked why the family would falsely accuse Ahmed of murdering her daughter, and said it would be “a most wicked conspiracy”.

Mr Kearney added: “Why would the family dishonour and sully the memory of their beloved and daughter, granddaughter and niece by branding her falsely a murder victim.”

In his closing arguments, defence QC Iain Duguid said it was the other members of the family who were lying.

He told jurors: "You can only convict her if you have credible and reliable evidence. She has nothing to prove.

“Please don't think this comes down to was Inaya suffocated or did she choke.

“The issue is have the prosecution proved that she suffocated."

Referring to his instructing solicitor Aamer Anwar he said that you would have thought it highly unlikely statistically he would have been on Las Ramblas in Barcelona at the time a terrorist drove a truck down it killing innocent people and added: “But it happened. You saw him on your television screeens in August this year.”

The QC said: “Don't guess or speculate or try to fill in the blanks when you come to deliberate.”

He asked why Ahmed who had been at a family party with her daughter the previous evening should decide to kill the child.

Mr Duguid said: “There is no explanation why she would do what the prosecution say she did.”

The trial before judge Lord Matthews continues.