From David Hardy in regards to how the FBI, in the Uniform Crime Report instructions, requires the local law enforcement define justified homicide in their own particular manner. Their definition significantly undercounts justified homicide as it is defined by conventional definitions:
The FBI count is artificially defined in a way that far undercounts defensive uses. The usual definition of self-defense with a deadly weapon is use of force immediately necessary in light of a reasonable belief that the perp is likely to inflict death or serious bodily injury.
But the FBI UCR Reporting Handbook at pp. 17-18 uses a completely different definition. Reporting officials are instructed, in the case of use of force by a non-LEO, to include under justifiable homicide only killings “The killing of a felon, during the commission of a felony, by a private citizen.”
The illustration given (do NOT list as justifiable a situation where a citizen shoots a fellow attacking him, in a crime of passion, with a broken bottle — the author must have watched too many 1950s movies about street fights) makes it apparent that the assault itself does not count as “commission of a felony.”
The FBI explicitly states in the UCR Handbook:
Reporting agencies should take care to ensure that they do not classify a killing as justifiable or excusable solely on the claims of self-defense or on the action of a coroner, prosecutor, grand jury, or court.
The coroner, prosecutor, grand jury, and court could unanimously agree it was a justified homicide and the FBI would still insist it not be included in the justified homicide stats.
I call that cheating.