Trial date set for NASCAR driver-turned-contractor accused of improper asbestos removal

A trial date has been set for Bradley Leighton, a former NASCAR driver turned contractor from Meredith, facing five felony environmental charges for improper asbestos removal. A jury will hear the case in the spring.

Leighton is facing felony charges for violating the Asbestos Management and Control Act, as he allegedly didn’t follow state laws for reporting and removing asbestos material when he demolished a house. He was indicted on Sept. 19, 2025, on five charges, alleging he committed the violations at 33 Waukewan St., in Meredith. Court documents state the felonies took place on Dec. 13, 2023.

Leighton was indicted for allegedly engaging in asbestos abatement activity for “wrecking or removing any load-supporting structural member containing or covered by Regulated Asbestos Containing Material.” This was allegedly material which would be crumbled or reduced to powder during demolition, and involved removing pieces with tar on lead flashing, window glazing, or paint on metal roofing.

He was also indicted for an asbestos demolition notification violation, where he allegedly demolished a home without telling local and state officials, and the home contained asbestos. Leighton was required to notify the state Department of Environmental Services and local government at least 10 working days before starting work.

The third indictment was an asbestos inspection violation, as he allegedly didn’t provide an asbestos inspection before starting demolition.

Leighton was charged for allegedly starting to demolish the residence before removing the material containing asbestos.

He was also indicted for violating asbestos removal procedures, for allegedly not abiding by procedure requirements.

Leighton is not a licensed asbestos removal contractor. He buys and sells homes in the Lakes Region, and owns seven in Meredith.

Attorney Jason Casey represents Leighton, and Assistant Attorney General Melissa Fales is prosecuting the case. Both appeared remotely on a television screen just after 9 a.m. on Aug. 26, in Belknap Superior Court.

The hearing was delayed, as Leighton had technical difficulties getting on camera. He was able to speak with the judge, but he didn’t know he needed to visually appear, and was unable to do so.

“Had I known I needed to do it by video, obviously, I would have gone back to the office,” Leighton said about 17 minutes after the start of the hearing.

Casey, of the law firm Hinckley Allen, apologized and took the blame.

“That is my fault for not making that clear,” Casey said.

Attorney Michael Connelly, also of Hinckley Allen, is also representing Leighton, but did not appear on Wednesday.

Leighton was originally represented by Nicholas Brodich, of Tarbell & Brodich, and waived a formal reading of his charges. He had dispositional conferences canceled on Dec. 2, and Jan. 23. Brodich withdrew from the case on Jan. 23.

Connelly notified the court he was representing Leighton as of Jan. 12, according to court records.

The January dispositional conference was canceled due to the change in representation, and the defense waived the right to a speedy trial.

Judge Mark Attorri entered the courtroom around 9:15 a.m., and said he would be the judge through trial, and instructed all parties to appear in person for further proceedings.

“Unless there’s a reason I know about, I want hearings to be in person, in court,” Attorri said.

He said a motion was submitted by the defense to appear remotely, and said Leighton appeared in person at the April 30 dispositional hearing.

That hearing was never seen by a judge. The Attorney General’s Office declined to comment on the reason for a new judge. Judge Elizabeth Leonard was previously presiding over the case.

Connelly did not respond to questions about the reason for the reassignment.

Attorri said the defendant was indicted about a year ago, and asked where the case stood. Casey said while the defense is looking to resolve the matter, both sides haven’t come to a settlement.

“We have not reached a resolution up to this point, although I expect discussions will continue,” Casey said.

Casey thought it appropriate to set a trial date, as negotiations continue.

Attorri asked if there will any issues with experts in the case. Fales said the expert disclosure deadline was Nov. 1, 2025. She also asked about a deadline for character evidence not admissible in court, and suggested Oct. 15.

Attorri said character evidence issues can be complex, so it would be best for the court to make sure there is enough time to rule on motions. He asked the defense and prosecution to confer on deadlines needed and the timeline needed for discovery.

A jury selection date was set for at 9 a.m. on Monday, March 22, 2027. Fales told Attorri she expects the trial to take three days, and dates were set for 10 a.m., March 29-31.