Hi, I'm a curious onlooker, and I'm not Buddhist, so excuse me if I don't use terminology.
But, surely, if a person commits an evil deed, or a series of evil deeds, then its we that are defining them based on these deeds? For instance, just because someone is perceived to have acted well, do we consider them to be 'good'? Why label anyone? I could go, so I will; but why call yourself Buddhist [with every respect]? How do you know what you are - is that not also a label?
Even as a child, when I heard adults telling children not to swear [i.e. using 'bad' language], I always though "how do they [we] know its bad language?" What? Just because we've told ourselves it is? It cannot be the word, but the intent. I could say to someone in the same tone, with the same intent "you f&^king idiot!!", or I could say "you idiot!!" Which is worse? Same: if someone buys a new car and I pay them a compliment on it and say "wow, that's f&*cking nice!", or "wow, that's nice!" What's worse?
Perception as conditioned.
My thoughts are that we are all fundamentally the same, in that we all have the same potential. I guess that some people may just have more 'energies' than others, in the same way some people might have thicker hair, or slimmer hands, or larger feet.
I've always went on the basis that: "just like everyone else in the world, I'm unique."
As for moving out of the way of an evil person... well, I see your point. Why put yourself in harms way? But why not? We don't need to want to be martyrs or heroes, we just need to be able to act in a selfless way, and whether that results in our physical bodies being harmed, or you never know, the stopping of an 'evil' deed, then no matter the outcome, as long as we have acted - as ignorance is not and can not be bliss. Think about if you see someone about to commit an evil deed, and you did nothing, ask yourself this: "who would feel worse?"