Julianne Cox, a former teacher at St Helena School, in Colchester, falsely claimed her retina had been surgically removed after cancer had been discovered in her right eye.

After making repeated false claims over treatment in 2015 and 2016, the school even purchased specialist equipment to help Ms Cox with her alleged vision issues.

Tests later found she had both of her eyes and there was no evidence of any surgery.

Giving evidence to a panel of the Teacher Regulation Agency in February, Ms Cox admitted she had never had cancer of the eye or any such surgery.

• READ MORE: Speeding drug driver jailed after killing 'caring' woman in wrong-way A13 crash

In 2016, she falsely claimed she had undergone a course of chemotherapy.

But after her lies came to light, her medical records were researched, and it was found she had undergone no such treatment.

St Helena School told her had she not resigned, she would have been sacked (Image: Newsquest)

The authority said one of Ms Cox’s misleading claims included telling the school she was wearing a glass eye.

An email from Ms Cox’s work account in October 2016 falsely stated she had “resumed chemotherapy”, but the disgraced teacher tried to pin the blame on her former partner.

In her evidence to the panel, she suggested her former partner had written the email without her knowledge, as he had complete access to her work laptop by ‘mirroring’ the device.

The panel did not accept Ms Cox’s story, finding it “unlikely” her partner would have “such detailed knowledge of school processes”.

The panel also found Ms Cox had given a false letter to the school, claiming it to be from the neurology department at Colchester Hospital.

The hospital confirmed the letter to be fake, with the “logo and letterhead inconsistent”.

Teacher pointed the finger at her former partner

In her evidence to the panel, Ms Cox insisted she did not write the letter, instead claiming she found it on her doormat, was handed it by her partner and told to take it into school.

The panel said: “Ms Cox alleged that she did not open the letter or read the content prior to submitting it to the school, but instead accepted what her partner had said.

“The panel did not accept this evidence as credible on the basis that the panel considered it likely that, had Ms Cox genuinely believed herself to be suffering with cancer of the eye, she would have at least read the content of the letter before providing it to her employer.”

• READ MORE: South Essex woman who repeatedly called 999 and ‘abused’ handlers is arrested

Ms Cox also admitted providing false information to administrative staff at Colchester Hospital, wrongly accusing the school of forging her signature on a consent form.

She further admitted commencing work at another school while still under contract at St Helena, in March 2017.

In June 2017, Essex Police confirmed it was to carry out a fraud investigation, but no further action was taken against Ms Cox.

'This was fraud or dishonesty at the most serious end of the spectrum'

The Teacher Regulation Agency put a prohibition order in place, banning Mx Cox from the profession indefinitely.

The panel said: “The gravity of Ms Cox’s misconduct meant that, in the panel’s view, it amounted to fraud or serious dishonesty at the most serious end of the spectrum.

“Of particular concern was the lack of insight and remorse Ms Cox showed at the hearing.

“Ms Cox had the benefit of some seven years to reflect on her behaviour and develop insight yet, despite this, she had failed to demonstrate sufficient insight and remorse at the hearing, and went so far as to provide what the panel considered to be dishonest evidence.

Get more stories like this delivered to your inbox every day by signing up to our morning newsletter - don't miss out.

“The panel was concerned that a longer review period would be unlikely to assist Ms Cox in developing insight.

“The panel also considered Ms Cox’s lack of credibility at the hearing in terms of the evidence she gave and its concern in respect of the high likelihood of the repetition of her conduct given that the panel believed she continued her pattern of dishonesty throughout the hearing.”