Now, either you are contradicting yourself, misunderstood my response, or I'm just not seeing your point. In any case, I'm having difficulty making sense what you are trying to communicate here.
I understand your post. You are saying that if Westerfield attempted to remove the hairs he wouldn't have missed all the others. Yor assumption presupposes that a cleaning would eliminate all hair. I disagree. A cleaning could occur and would not be likely to eliminate all hair but could eliminate most hair. I don't even think an auto detailer is that good.
If it was cleaned then hair would be removed and it could be assumed that if any is left there was probably more of the same type of hair befoe cleaning.
If it was cleaned then hair would be removed and it could be assumed that if any is left there was probably more of the same type of hair befoe cleaning."
I have heard of no reliable evidence that indicates it had been cleaned to any degree and in fact, there is evidence and testimony to indicate that there was not a serious cleaning of the MH attempted.
If all the dog and human hair that was found was the result of it having been left over, after a cleaning, then, IMO, the MH would have had to have been a literal mass of hair, prior to any such hypothetical cleaning. Again, that's JMO.