Good and evil are quite distinct moral concepts from right and wrong. It is perfectly possible to behave in the right way with respect to one's ethics and the law in general and yet still cause evil. This need not show a flaw in the ethical system in question; it may just as easily reveal ignorance or carelessness. We might judge these as moral failings, but a word such as 'evil' has come to mean something far more damning.
Similarly, civil disobedience shows that sometimes the usual ethical and legal norms must be transgressed because our understanding of what is good or evil takes precedence. We might express this by saying that a particular law is wrong, which is another way of saying what is deemed right by the law is wrong by our personal ethical judgement. It would be an even stronger objection to say that a certain law is evil. We would not usually judge the Nuremberg Laws of 1935 that stripped Jews of their German citizenship as merely wrong (like unfair taxation) but as a great evil.
Thus what is good and what is right need not match and good people can inadvertently cause evil. The simplistic story that all evil must be caused by evil people draws us into fallacious reasoning. Since only a cartoon villain revels in evilness, one consequence of thinking along these lines is an inability to recognise the evils to which we have all contributed indirectly.
Part 14 of 23 in the Pentenary series.