Did King David rape Bath-sheba?

[John V]

Hmmm, that has me thinking... Deut 22:25 specifically refers to a woman who is engaged to another man. It makes sense that it would also apply to a married woman (which for the writers of the time may have been the same thing). In that case, it was covered under the accusation of taking Uriah's wife. Since David repented of his crimes, then the decision to spare his life would cover the rape accusation.

I don't know if you honestly missed v. 23-24 or are intentionally skipping over it, but it's more applicable, as it refers to the same situation but in a city. In such a case, the act is presumed to be consensual (and both parties punishable by death) unless there's reasonable evidence that it was rape, such as screams from the woman. By your own method of analyzing what we're not told, well, we're not told that she screamed, so it should be viewed as consensual.

That explanation seems to fit the narrative better than the "not enough information" angle. David rapes Uriah's wife, then arranges for his murder and takes her as his own wife. Why doesn't Nathan accuse David and Bath-sheba of adultery?

More of what we're NOT told.

Because that isn't what happened. Why doesn't Nathan accuse David of rape? He does, when he describes how David "has taken [Uriah's] wife to be [his] own wife."

Consider the punishment for the crime: the death of the child conceived. Death of the child was punishment to Bathsheba as well (and probably moreso than to David), and is an indicator that she was was also guilty.