Transcript for Las Vegas 'Road Rage' Suspect Pleads Not Guilty
We begin with the latest on the case of that mom in las Vegas gunned down in front of her home last month. The man charged with her murder appeared in court pleading not guilty in a case that looks more complicated than the first reports of road rage. ABC's kendis Gibson has the story. Reporter: It's the first we're hearing from Erich nowsch. How do you plead to count one murder with use of a deadly weapon? Not guilty. Reporter: The 19-year-old pleading not guilty Thursday to three felony charges including the murder of Las Vegas mom tammy Meyers. The deadly encounter beginning in this school parking lot last month. Tammy was teaching her teenage daughter how to drive. But police say they were told nowsch thought the people in the car were looking for him so he called a friend to pick him up. Tammy's husband says that's when they followed her and pulled up alongside. What did he say? It was along some of the line I'm going to kill you and your daughter. Reporter: Police reports show Toomey got her older son armed with a gun and went looking for the suspects when they found them nowsch allegedly opened fire before chasing them back to their home and police say firing that deadly shot into tammy's head. We are conducting our own investigations and some of those already appear to be bearing fruit. Reporter: Nowsch's lawyers speaking with ABC news overnight about possible options for his defense. Self-defense appears to be a very likely direction for us to go on this case. Reporter: In another bizarre twist nowsch's lawyers confirm their client knew tammy Meyers but would only say this about their relationship. There was interaction going on and potentially even funds being exchanged. Reporter: As for the Meyers' family tammy's husband firing off an impassioned Facebook post overnight defending his family's name but say they will not officially comment until they see how the prosecution's case unfolds. For "Good morning America," kendis Gibson, ABC news, los Angeles. A lot of twists and turns here. Dan Abrams here for more on this and there does seem to be layers. So much seems to have changed about what we thought we knew about this case from the beginning. But the question becomes how much does all of that matter legally? And the answer is maybe not that much. Because -- Why? The fundamental legal question is it self-defense and who shot first? And it sounds like the police believe they have evidence that the defendant shot first. Now, what evidence could that be? First of all his own statements. It seems he was talking to friends and made a statement to the police. They may have physical evidence at the scene meaning shell casings or other evidence which suggests and this is a very important point you heard in the piece there that maybe he shot at the car before they got to the house first. That would be one thing but if he shot first does that end the case? No, but it certainly is strong evidence. The only reason you'd be justified in shooting first would be if somehow you were reasonably in fear for your life. Someone has a gun to your head and you shoot first you can probably claim self-defense but when you're talking about shooting from a car, it gets a lot harder to claim that. So you've also got which is going to become important the testimony of the son himself, right. He was there. He witnessed this but the question is going to be why has this story evolved. How much does it matter that the family's story has changed so much. Certainly matters as to their credibility and depends who has been saying this, right? I mean we keep hearing that, you know, the family says. You've got to believe that a lot of these accounts are coming from the son because he was the one who was there. If his story has changed over time that would certainly impact his credibility. Okay, Dan Abrams, thanks very much.
This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.