A mother accused of murdering her toddler daughter was “solely responsible” for the death of the child, a court has been told.
The High Court in Glasgow has heard prosecution claims that Sadia Ahmed “calmly snuffed out the life” of Inaya Ahmed last year.
Advocate Depute Paul Kearney made the statements as he asked the jury to return a guilty verdict against the accused.
Ahmed, 28, is on trial accused of smothering 14-month-old Inaya by placing a pillow over her face, or by other means, at their home in Glasgow’s Drumchapel area on April 17 2016. The child died in hospital three days later.
She denies the charge.
In his closing speech, Mr Kearney told the jury: “On the 17th of April 2016, Inaya Ahmed, a beautiful 14-month-old child, stopped breathing and never breathed again on her own.
“There were valiant efforts of paramedics and doctors that got her heart beating again but she never again began breathing. The effect of the loss of blood and the loss of oxygen to her brain caused irreversible damage and caused her death.”
He went on: “The Crown contends, on the evidence you have heard, that it is clear that her mother, the accused Sadia Ahmed, is solely responsible.”
Mr Kearney added: “The Crown contends that she calmly snuffed out the life of her child.”
The prosecutor referred to claims that the child had choked as the “big lie” in the case.
“The Crown contends that she suffocated. Inaya did not choke,” Mr Kearney said.
“The Crown contends that the cover-up story of choking on bread was precisely that, it was a cover-up,” he added.
He maintained that other family members had initially told the “story” that the child had choked to “protect” the accused, but that they had given truthful accounts when they gave evidence in court.
“Family members have finally come to this court and done what you might think is right and told the truth about what happened that day, and about what they were told that day,” he said.
The Advocate Depute, who described it as a “tragic” case, told the jury: “The only explanation which fits with the facts in this case is that Sadia Ahmed killed her daughter.”
Defence QC Ian Duguid later urged the jury to return a verdict of acquittal.
He questioned the idea of an initial attempt at a cover-up and suggested that “the truth might be that she (Inaya) really choked on bread”.
He told how everybody who was interviewed on the day in question “was giving exactly the same story”.
“The easy answer, the obvious answer, is that she (the accused) is telling the truth and they are all telling the truth as well,” he said of that time.
The lawyer told the jury the Crown rely on corroboration for their case in the form of evidence suggesting there was no bread in the room at the house and no bread found in the girl’s throat. Prosecutors also point to evidence suggesting she was “unemotional” and that choking fatalities are statistically rare, he said.
But Mr Duguid pointed to other evidence that the accused was “shell-shocked” and “distraught”.
He also spoke of evidence of food debris in the toddler’s lungs and said Inaya had not been properly weaned on to solid food.
Choking would be “a lot more likely for this child”, the QC said.
He also asked the jury to question how the toddler’s “breathing anatomy” became inflamed.
Mr Duguid said the prosecution never has to prove motive, but he asked jurors to consider that “the absence of the motive is sometimes quite a telling feature” in a case.
The QC also said the accused had been living in the household “basically as a servant” and he described the family as “greedy”.
He asked the jury to consider whether the relatives were people who could be considered credible and reliable witnesses.
Sadia Ahmed denies the single charge against her.
The trial before judge Lord Matthews continues on Wednesday.