A rebuttable presumption is raised that the child is a child in need of services because of an act or omission of the child's parent, guardian, or custodian if the state introduces competent evidence of probative value that:

1. (1) the child has been injured;

2. (2) at the time the child was injured, the parent, guardian, or custodian:

   1. (A) had the care, custody, or control of the child; or
   2. (B) had legal responsibility for the care, custody, or control of the child;
3. (3) the injury would not ordinarily be sustained except for the act or omission of a parent, guardian, or custodian; and

4. (4) there is a reasonable probability that the injury was not accidental.

   [Pre-1997 Recodification Citation: 31-6-7-13(b).]

As added by P.L.1-1997, SEC.17. Amended by P.L.48-2012, SEC.60.