Thanks. So we have testimony from you that you went to Jerusalem and saw the site traditionally claimed to be the place of Jesus' burial.
I accept your testimony as true.
The difference between your case and that of Melito of Sardis is that we don't have any testimony from Melito saying that he visited Jerusalem specifically, much less that he saw the sites of Jesus' crucifixion or burial. Some (e.g., Anthony Harvey) have inferred that Melito must have visited Jerusalem and must have been shown the sites of Jesus' crucifixion and burial .
The first of these visitors of whom we have any record was Melito of Sardis. Eusebius preserves the Preface to one of his books, in which Melito writes that, in order to obtain authentic information about the canon of the Old Testament, he 'went to the East and came to the place where the proclamation was made and the deeds were done (Greek omitted, scroll upthread for the screenshot). This last phrase is somewhat oblique; but its meaning can hardly be doubted: Melito went to Jerusalem. When he asked to see the site of the crucifixion (Greek omitted), he was doubtless taken down the main street to the centre of the city, and shown the new Roman Forum where, only a few decades before, the rock and the tomb had still been visible. He may possibly have wondered why the spot did not lie outside the walls of the city. [Harvey, 'Melito and Jerusalem', JTS 17 (1966) 401-404]
Harvey's inference that Melito must have visited Jerusalem could indeed be doubted by reasonable people, and his inference that Melito must have had the site of Jesus' crucifixion and burial pointed out to him because of he says the murder (of Jesus) occurred 'in the middle of Jerusalem' (as opposed to outside the walls) in Peri Pascha 94 is sheer speculation. 'In the middle of Jerusalem' is probably rhetorical, that is , it suits it Melito's poetic and theological sensibilities in his literary work (as Urban Von Wahlde and Alistair Sykes-Stewart take it) and need not be taken as an indicator of where the physical site of the crucifixion was in Melito's own time (as Harvey would have it).
I am contesting the reliability of Harvey's inferences, not Melito's testimony about his travels.
Best,
Ken