Linking substantive criminal law and procedural notions offers an interesting, and yet mostly unexplored, point of view. It can be argued that the idea according to which criminal procedure is a mere tool to enforce substantive criminal law must be revisited. There are good reasons to claim that the evolution of the general theory of crime has been driven, relevantly or exclusively, by the need to facilitate the reach of a certain evidentiary standard in practice. The subsequent changes of criminal law notions like dolus, offender, limits in the omission, causation crisis and development of objective imputation, as well as other concepts, produced the (unlikely casual) consequence a facilitation in the trial fact finding. If the above is correct, then an interesting debate on the ethical foundation of such evolution can be started.