A blogger has revealed the identity of a New Zealand Olympian who was charged with raping and beating his wife, even though a judge had suppressed the man's name.

The judge ruled that the man's name, occupation and age could not be published or broadcast.

But that did not stop high profile right-wing internet blogger Cameron Slater.

This is the second furore to erupt in New Zealand over the issue of name suppression in the past month.

The blogger says he has done nothing wrong and is willing to fight the matter in court if he has to.

Mr Slater blogs under the name Whaleoil and is angry that the Olympian was granted name suppression. He says most average Kiwis do not get that luxury.

"I've posted a series of pictures. If you put it together I guess [it] will identify who it is," Mr Slater said.

"I've had the person's lawyer on the phone threatening me with all sorts and I just told him to go away. I'm not taking it down. I won't back down.

Mr Slater has not published the Olympian's age, name or occupation. But he has published four pictures.

"That's the way I'm going to get around it," he said.

Dishing the dirt

A few weeks ago a New Zealand judge granted name suppression to an entertainer who pleaded guilty to rubbing his genitals in a 16-year-old girl's face.

His lawyers successfully argued that the singer's career would suffer.

Mr Slater was livid and revealed the identity of the entertainer. When he heard about the Olympian he decided to do it again.

And he does not believe his actions will jeopardise the Olympian's trial.

"This sports person has actually been forbidden by the judge to approach witnesses. So what does that tell you about his demeanour?" he said.

Philip Morgan is a barrister in Hamilton near Auckland and a member of the New Zealand Law Society. He believes the blogger has crossed a line.

"I think it's disgraceful conduct and hopefully he'll get detected and prosecuted," he said.

"There is one rule that applies to everyone. Not everybody applies for suppression. Not everybody needs suppression.

"But where somebody has got a meritorious case for suppression then the court will consider it and if it is a genuinely meritorious case, grant it.

"It is almost invariably only interim suppression. Final suppression is rare. And the same rule applies to everybody."

Media law expert Ursula Cheer says bloggers need to be careful they do not blow trials.

"If a trial was going on yes... and in that case it could also be a contempt," she said.

But Mr Slater is sticking by his guns. He is positive he has done nothing wrong.

"[It's] more against judges. They seem to have name suppression willy-nilly for celebrities to protect their reputation," he said.

"In the sense the case here to protect his reputation is he doesn't have one. The guy has been in jail before. He's got previous violence convictions. There is no reputation."

The Olympian has been granted bail and will reappear in court next month.